e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 |
|
or |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File Number: 1-14094
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Michigan |
|
38-2626206 |
(State of Incorporation) |
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
|
26255 American Drive, Southfield, MI |
|
48034-6112 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(248) 358-1100
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class |
|
Name of Exchange on Which Registered |
|
|
|
Common Stock, $.01 par value per share |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of
Registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K or any
amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer þ Non-accelerated
filer o
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common
stock held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price
at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and
asked price of such common equity, as of June 30, 2006 was
$239,895,685. As of March 2, 2007, there were
29,525,165 shares of the Companys common stock
($.01 par value) outstanding.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
Certain portions of the Registrants Proxy Statement for
the 2007 Annual Meeting scheduled for May 9, 2007 are
incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PART I
The Company
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. (We,
Our, or Us) (NYSE: MIG) is a holding
company organized as a Michigan corporation in 1985. We were
formerly known as Star Holding Company and in November 1995,
upon acquisition of Meadowbrook, Inc. (Meadowbrook),
we changed our name. Meadowbrook was founded in 1955 as
Meadowbrook Insurance Agency and was subsequently incorporated
in Michigan in 1965.
We serve as a holding company for our wholly owned subsidiary
Star Insurance Company (Star), and Stars
wholly owned subsidiaries, Savers Property and Casualty
Insurance Company, Williamsburg National Insurance Company, and
Ameritrust Insurance Corporation (which collectively are
referred to as the Insurance Company Subsidiaries),
as well as, American Indemnity Insurance Company, Ltd. and
Preferred Insurance Company, Ltd. We also serve as a holding
company for Meadowbrook, Crest Financial Corporation, and their
subsidiaries.
Pursuant to Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation
Number (FIN) 46(R), we do not consolidate our
subsidiaries, Meadowbrook Capital Trust I and II (the
Trusts), as they are not variable interest entities
and we are not the primary beneficiary of the Trusts. Our
consolidated financial statements, however, include the equity
earnings of the Trusts. In addition and in accordance with
FIN 46(R), we do not consolidate our subsidiary American
Indemnity Insurance Company, Ltd. (American
Indemnity). While we and our subsidiary Star are the
common shareholders, neither are the primary beneficiaries of
American Indemnity. Our consolidated financial statements,
however, include the equity earnings of American Indemnity.
Significant Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
November 1, 2005, we acquired Insurance & Benefit
Consultants (IBC) of Sarasota, Florida. IBC is a
retail agency specializing in group and individual health
insurance products and personal financial planning services. |
|
|
|
In August 1999, we acquired the assets of TPA Associates, Inc.,
all the outstanding stock of TPA Insurance Agency, Inc., and
Preferred Insurance Agency, Inc., and approximately ninety-four
percent of the outstanding stock of Preferred Insurance Company,
Ltd. (PICL) (collectively, TPA). TPA is
a program-oriented risk management company that provides risk
management services to self-insured clients, manages alternative
risk management programs, and performs underwriting, policy
issuance and loss control services for an unaffiliated insurance
company. In January 2002, we purchased the remaining six percent
minority interest of PICL. |
|
|
|
In July 1998, we acquired Florida Preferred Administrators, Inc.
(Florida Preferred), a third party administrator,
and Southeastern Holding Corporation, a holding company for
Ameritrust Insurance Corporation (Ameritrust), both
of which are domiciled in Sarasota, Florida. In December 2002,
Southeastern Holding Corporation was dissolved and Ameritrust
became a wholly owned subsidiary of Star. Florida Preferred
provides a broad range of risk management services for
Ameritrust. |
|
|
|
In July 1997, we acquired Crest Financial Corporation
(Crest), a California-based holding company, which
formerly owned Williamsburg National Insurance Company
(Williamsburg). Crest provides risk management
services primarily to Williamsburg. On December 31, 1999,
Williamsburg became a wholly owned subsidiary of Star. |
|
|
|
In November 1996, we acquired Association Self Insurance
Services, Inc. (ASI) of Montgomery, Alabama, which
is a full service risk management operation focused on insurance
pools and trust funds whose services include claims
administration and handling, loss control and prevention, managed |
2
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
care, and policy issuance. ASIs operations were
consolidated with Meadowbrooks existing operations in
Montgomery, Alabama. |
|
|
|
In July 1990, we acquired Savers Property and Casualty Insurance
Company (Savers). |
Employees
At March 1, 2007, we employed approximately 660 associates
to service our clients and provide management services to our
Insurance Operations as defined below. We believe we have
good relationships with our employees.
Overview
We are a full-service risk management organization which focuses
on niche or specialty program business and risk management
solutions for agents, brokers, professional and trade
associations, pools, trusts, and small to medium-sized insureds.
Our programs are primarily on a regional basis with a single
line of business within a program. Within the workers
compensation line of business we have a regional focus in New
England, Florida, and Nevada. Within the commercial auto and
commercial multiple peril we have a regional focus in
California. Our fee-for-service business is also on a regional
basis with an emphasis in the Midwest and southeastern regions,
as well as the self-insured market in Nevada. Our corporate
strategy emphasizes a regional focus and diverse sources of
revenue between underwritten premiums, service fee revenue, and
commissions. This allows us to leverage fixed costs without
sacrificing pricing of our insurance premiums. Currently, we
manage over $700 million in gross written premiums.
We were founded in 1955 as a retail insurance agency. We earn
commission revenue through the operation of our retail property
and casualty insurance agencies, located in Michigan,
California, and Florida. Our Michigan-based retail insurance
agency operations are consistently ranked as a leading business
insurance agency in Michigan and the United States.
Since 1976, we have specialized in providing risk management
solutions for our clients. By forming risk-sharing partnerships,
we align our financial objectives with our clients. By utilizing
our products and services, small to medium-sized client groups
gain access to more sophisticated risk management techniques
previously available only to larger corporations. This enables
our clients to control insurance costs and potentially turn risk
management into a profit center. By having their capital at
risk, our clients are motivated to reduce exposure and share in
the underwriting profits and investment income derived from
their risk management plan.
Based upon the particular risk management goals of our clients
and our assessment of the opportunity for operating profit, we
offer solutions on a managed basis, a risk-sharing basis, or a
fully-insured basis, in response to a specific market
opportunity. In a managed program, we earn service fee revenue
by providing management and other services to a clients
risk-bearing entity, but generally do not share in the operating
results. In a risk-sharing program, we share the operating
results with the client through a reinsurance agreement with a
captive or rent-a-captive. The captive and rent-a-captive
structures are licensed reinsurance companies and are accounted
for under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 113, Accounting
and Reporting for Reinsurance of Short-Duration and
Long-Duration Contracts. In risk-sharing programs, we
derive revenue from net earned premiums, fee-for-service revenue
and commissions, and investment income. In addition, we may
benefit from the fees our risk management subsidiary earns for
services we perform on behalf of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. These fees are eliminated upon consolidation.
However, the fees associated with the captives portion of
the program are reimbursed through a ceding commission. In a
fully-insured program, we provide insurance products without a
risk-bearing mechanism and derive revenue from net earned
premiums and investment income.
3
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
We have developed a broad range of capabilities and services in
the design, management, and servicing of our clients risk
management needs. These capabilities and services include:
|
|
|
|
|
program and product design; |
|
|
|
underwriting, risk selection, and policy issuance; |
|
|
|
sales, marketing, and public relations to members of groups; |
|
|
|
administration of risk-bearing entities, such as mutual
insurance companies, captives, rent-a-captives, public entity
pools, and risk retention and risk purchasing groups; |
|
|
|
claims handling and administration; |
|
|
|
loss prevention and control; |
|
|
|
reinsurance placement; |
|
|
|
risk analysis and identification; |
|
|
|
actuarial and loss reserve analysis; |
|
|
|
information technology and processing; |
|
|
|
feasibility studies; |
|
|
|
litigation management; |
|
|
|
accounting and financial statement preparation; |
|
|
|
regulatory compliance; and |
|
|
|
audit support. |
We remain committed to our underwriting discipline and
selectivity, and will continue to focus on improving
profitability within our specialty insurance and fee-based
programs. We continue to move towards our long-term target of a
return on beginning equity of 14% to 16%. We believe we can
achieve a bottom line annual growth rate of 15% or better over
the long-term. During 2007, we expect gross written premium to
grow by $45.0 million to $55.0 million. However, we
will not sacrifice price adequacy to gain market share. This
anticipated growth will come from new programs implemented in
2005 and 2006. Improving productivity is also an important
factor in achieving our long-term return on equity goals. We
continue to review our business processes, which may include
those of our agents and clients, to determine how we can use
technology, training, and other best practices to reduce
frictional costs associated with processing our business. If we
make it easy for our clients to process business, we will create
a higher level of customer service, loyalty, and satisfaction.
Company Segments
We earn commission revenue through the operation of our retail
property and casualty insurance agencies, located in Michigan,
California, and Florida. Our agency operations produce
commercial, personal lines, life, and accident and health
insurance, with more than fifty unaffiliated insurance carriers.
The agency produces an immaterial amount of business for our
affiliated Insurance Company Subsidiaries.
In total, our agency operations generated commissions of
$12.3 million, $11.3 million, and $9.8 million,
for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004,
respectively.
4
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
|
|
|
Specialty Risk Management Operations |
Our specialty risk management operations segment focuses on
specialty or niche insurance business in which we provide
various services and coverages tailored to meet specific
requirements of defined client groups and their members. These
services include risk management consulting, claims
administration and handling, loss control and prevention, and
reinsurance placement, along with various types of property and
casualty insurance coverage, including workers
compensation, commercial multiple peril, general liability,
commercial auto liability, and inland marine. Insurance coverage
is provided primarily to associations or similar groups of
members and to specified classes of business of our
agent-partners. We recognize revenue related to the services and
coverages from our specialty risk management operations within
seven categories: net earned premiums, management fees, claims
fees, loss control fees, reinsurance placement, investment
income, and net realized gains (losses).
Net earned premiums include the following lines of business:
|
|
|
|
|
Workers Compensation |
|
|
|
Commercial Multiple Peril |
|
|
|
General Liability |
Errors and Omissions
Automobile
Owners, Landlord and Tenant
|
|
|
|
|
Employment Practices Liability |
|
|
|
Professional Liability |
Medical
Real Estate Appraisers
Pharmacists
|
|
|
|
|
Inland Marine |
|
|
|
Product Liability |
|
|
|
Excess Reinsurance |
|
|
|
Commercial Property |
|
|
|
Description of Specialty Risk Management Programs |
With a managed program, we earn fee-for-service revenue by
providing management and other services to a clients
risk-bearing entity, but generally do not share in the operating
results of the program. We believe our managed programs provide
a consistent source of revenue, as well as opportunities for
revenue growth without a proportionate increase in capital.
Revenue growth may occur through the sale of existing products
to additional members of the group, the expansion of coverages
and services provided to existing programs and the creation of
programs for new client groups.
Services for which we receive fee revenue from managed programs
include:
|
|
|
|
|
program design and development; |
|
|
|
underwriting; |
5
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance placement; |
|
|
|
policy administration; |
|
|
|
loss prevention and control; |
|
|
|
claims administration and handling; |
|
|
|
litigation management; |
|
|
|
information technology and processing; |
|
|
|
accounting functions; and |
|
|
|
general management and oversight of the program. |
The fees we receive from our managed programs are generally
either a fixed amount or based on a percentage of premium
serviced.
We provide insurance management services to public entity
associations and currently manage public entity pools and other
insurance entities, which provide insurance coverage for
approximately 1,700 participants, including city, county,
township, and village governments in three states, as well as
other diverse industry groups.
Client Risk-Sharing. With a client risk-sharing program,
our Insurance Company Subsidiaries underwrite individual primary
insurance policies for members of a group or association, or a
specific industry and then share the operating results with the
client or client group through a reinsurance agreement with a
captive or rent-a-captive. In some instances, a captive owned by
a client or client group reinsures a portion of the risk on a
quota-share basis. A captive is an insurance company or
reinsurance company, which is formed for the purpose of insuring
or reinsuring risks related to the businesses of its
shareholders or members. A rent-a-captive allows organizations
to obtain the benefits of a captive insurance company, without
the initial costs and capital investment required to form their
own captive. This is often an interim step utilized by groups
and associations prior to forming their own captive. The captive
and rent-a-captive structures are licensed reinsurance
companies, which have a self-sustaining integrated set of
activities and assets, and are in the reinsurance business for
the purpose of providing a return to their investors, who are
the shareholders (primary beneficiaries) of the
captive company. The primary beneficiaries have their own equity
at risk, decision making authority, and the ability to absorb
losses. Therefore, the transactions associated with the captive
and rent-a-captive structures are accounted for under the
provisions of SFAS No. 113 Accounting and
Reporting for Reinsurance of Short-Duration and Long-Duration
Contracts.
In addition to premium revenue and investment income from our
net retained portion of the operating results, we may also be
compensated through the receipt of fees for policy issuance
services and acquisition costs, captive administration,
reinsurance placement, loss prevention services, and claims
administrative and handling services. In addition, we may
benefit from the fees our risk management subsidiary earns for
services we perform on behalf of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. These fees are eliminated upon consolidation.
However, the fees associated with the captives portion of
the program are reimbursed through a ceding commission. For
financial reporting purposes, ceding commissions are treated as
a reduction in underwriting expenses.
Our experience has been that the number of claims and the cost
of losses tend to be lower in risk-sharing programs than with
traditional forms of insurance. We believe that client
risk-sharing motivates participants to focus on loss prevention,
risk control measures and adherence to stricter underwriting
guidelines.
6
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The following schematic illustrates the basic elements in many
of our client risk-sharing programs.
CAPTIVE RISK-SHARING STRUCTURE
|
|
(1) |
We account for transactions with these risk-sharing clients as
reinsurance under the provisions of SFAS No. 113
Accounting and Reporting for Reinsurance of
Short-Duration and Long-Duration Clients. |
The captives shareholders, which may or may not include
the insured, and its board of directors make the decision to
form the captive or terminate the captive, based upon either
their own analysis or the analysis performed by an independent
third party consultant they hire. The shareholders of the
captive make the decision whether to invest and how much to
invest in the captive. This decision may be based upon advice
from third party consultants.
The agent of the business will make the decision to submit the
risk to the insurance company for underwriting and the
policyholders make the decision to purchase the quoted policy.
The captive administrator provides administrative services to
the captive in exchange for a fee. This fee is usually a fixed
amount, but can be a variable amount based upon premium volume,
and is negotiated on an annual basis with the captives
board of directors. Such services may include bookkeeping,
providing regulatory information, and other administrative
services. We do not provide loss prevention, claims handling,
underwriting, and other insurance services directly to the
captive. However, our risk management services subsidiary
provides these services to our Insurance Company Subsidiaries
for a fee, which is eliminated upon consolidation. The costs
associated with these services are included within the premium
quoted to the policyholder.
In applying FIN 46(R)s provisions to the captive
risk-sharing structure, our variable interest in the captive is
limited to administrative fees based upon a fixed amount or a
percentage of premiums and the credit risk associated with any
reinsurance recoverables recognized.
7
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The captives are generally capitalized with common stock and may
use preferred stock in isolated instances. The captives
variability is: (1) created based upon the experience of
their portion of business directly written through our Insurance
Company Subsidiaries and ceded to the captive on a quota share
basis; and (2) absorbed by the captives shareholders.
In general, the captives common and/or preferred
shareholders are either the agents or producers of the business,
a sponsoring group or association, a group of policyholders, a
policyholder, or a general agent. The captives
shareholders are not related parties of ours pursuant to either
SFAS No. 57, Related Party Disclosures, or
paragraph 16 of FIN 46(R).
By design, the capital base of the captive is structured to
absorb the projected losses of the program, and the
captives shareholders bear the risk of loss. We protect
ourselves from potential credit risk related to reinsurance
recoverables from the captive by a collateral requirement
included within a trust agreement equal to a multiple of the
estimated reserves for losses and unearned premiums. In
addition, we monitor the capital adequacy and financial leverage
ratios of the captive to mitigate future credit risk.
In another variation of client risk-sharing, we establish
retrospectively rated programs for individual accounts. With
this type of program, we work with the client to develop the
appropriate self-insured retention and loss fund amount and then
help arrange for
excess-of-loss
reinsurance. The client reimburses us for all claim payments
within the clients retention. We generally earn a
management fee (which includes claims and loss control fees). In
most of these programs, we also participate in the operating
results of the reinsurance coverage and receive a ceding
commission in the client risk-sharing reinsurance contract to
reimburse us for expenses and our fee for services.
In another version of client risk-sharing, the agent accepts an
up-front commission that is adjusted up or down based on
operating results of the program produced.
With a fully-insured program, we provide our insurance products
without a risk-sharing mechanism and derive revenue from net
earned premiums and investment income. Fully-insured programs
are generally developed only in response to specific market
opportunities and when we believe there is potential to evolve
into a risk-sharing mechanism.
|
|
|
Description of Major Specialty Risk Management
Services |
Our risk management subsidiary provides the following services
to our fee-for-service clients and to our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries for a fee. The fees associated with services
provided to our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are eliminated
upon consolidation. The costs associated with these services are
charged to our insureds in the form of premiums.
Program and Product Design. Before implementing a new
program, we generally review: (1) financial projections for
the contemplated program, (2) historical loss experience,
(3) actuarial studies of the underlying risks, (4) the
credit worthiness of the potential client, and (5) the
availability of reinsurance. Our senior management team and
associates representing each of the risk-management disciplines
work together to design, market, and implement new programs. Our
due diligence process is structured to provide a risk assessment
of the program and how the program fits within our entity wide
business plan and risk profile.
Underwriting Risk Selection and Policy Issuance. Through
our risk management subsidiary, we perform underwriting services
for our Insurance Company Subsidiaries that meet our corporate
underwriting guidelines. We maintain substantially all ultimate
underwriting authority and monitor compliance with our corporate
underwriting guidelines through a periodic underwriting audit
process and with a system of internal control procedures. Our
underwriting personnel help develop the proper criteria for
selecting risks, while actuarial and reinsurance personnel
evaluate and recommend the appropriate levels of rate and risk
retention.
8
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The program is then tailored according to the requirements and
qualifications of each client. With managed programs, we may
perform underwriting services based upon the profile of the
specific program for a fee.
Claims Administration and Handling. Through our risk
management subsidiary, we provide substantially all claims
management and handling services for workers compensation
and most other casualty lines, such as property, professional
liability, and general liability. Our claims handling standards
are set by our corporate claims department and are monitored
through self-audits, corporate claim audits, internal controls,
and other executive oversight reports. We handle substantially
all claims functions for the majority of the programs we manage.
Our involvement in claims administration and handling provides
feedback to program managers in assessing the clients risk
environment and the overall structure of the program.
Loss Prevention and Control. Through our risk management
subsidiary, we provide loss control services, which are designed
to help clients prevent or limit the impact of certain loss
events. Through an evaluation of the clients workplace
environment, our loss control specialists assist the client in
planning and implementing a loss prevention program and, in
certain cases, provide educational and training programs. With
our managed programs, we provide these same services for a fee
based upon the profile of the specific program.
Administration of Risk-Bearing Entities. We generate fee
revenue by assisting in the formation and administration of
risk-bearing entities for clients and agents. We currently
provide administrative services for over fourteen captives
and/or rent-a-captives and hold an insignificant minority
interest in two of these captives. These services are provided
by our subsidiaries in Bermuda and Barbados.
Reinsurance Placement. Through our reinsurance
intermediary subsidiary, Meadowbrook Intermediaries, Inc., we
earn commissions by placing
excess-of-loss
reinsurance and insurance coverage with high deductibles for
insurance companies, captives, and self-insured programs we
manage. Reinsurance is also placed for clients who do not have
other business relationships with us.
Sales, Marketing, and Public Relations. We market our
programs and services to associations, professional and trade
groups, local, regional and national insurance agents, and
insurance consultants. Sales and marketing efforts include
personal contact through independent agents, direct mail,
telemarketing, association publications/newsletters,
advertising, internet-based marketing including our corporate
website (www.meadowbrook.com), and subsidiary branch/division
websites. We access or manage a range of distribution systems
and regional agency networks on a program-specific basis.
We also participate in seminars, trade and industry conventions
such as Target Markets Program Administrators Association,
American Association of Managing General Agents, American
Society of Association Executives, Self Insurance Institute of
America, National Association of Professional Surplus Lines
Offices, Public Risk Management Association, and various
individual state independent agent associations.
In 2000, we launched our Advantage System
(Advantage). Advantage is an internet-based business
processing system for quoting and binding workers
compensation insurance policies. In addition to reducing our
internal administrative processing costs, Advantage enhances
underwriting practices by automating risk selection criteria.
Insurance Operations
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries issue insurance policies.
Through our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, we engage in
specialty risk management programs where we assume underwriting
risks in exchange for premium. Our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries primarily focus on specialty programs designed
specifically for trade groups and associations, whose members
are homogeneous in nature. Members are typically
small-to-medium sized
businesses. Our programs focus on select classes of property and
casualty business which, through our due diligence process, we
believe have demonstrated a fundamentally sound prospect for
generating underwriting profits. We occasionally do offer our
programs on a multi-state basis; but more generally, our
programs operate on a regional or state-specific basis. We
maintain underwriting
9
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
authority through our regional offices based upon underwriting
guidelines set forth by our corporate underwriting department,
which we monitor through underwriting audits and a series of
executive underwriting and rate monitor reports. We avoid
geographic concentration of risks that might lead to natural or
intentionally caused catastrophic events. We also handle the
majority of our claims through our regional offices based upon
standards set forth by our corporate claims office and monitored
through a series of self-audits and corporate claims audit,
internal control audits, and executive claims monitoring
reports. American Indemnity and PICL, which offer clients
captive or rent-a-captive options, complement our Insurance
Company Subsidiaries.
Star, Savers, Williamsburg and Ameritrust are domiciled in
Michigan, Missouri, California, and Florida, respectively.
American Indemnity and PICL are Bermuda-based insurance
companies.
We may at times place risks directly with third party insurance
carriers and participate in the risk as a reinsurance partner.
Such arrangements typically generate management fee revenue and
provide a means to manage premium leverage ratios.
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are authorized to write
business, on either an admitted or surplus lines basis, in all
fifty states. Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries primarily offer
workers compensation, commercial multiple peril, general
liability, inland marine, and other liability coverages. For the
year ended December 31, 2006, the workers
compensation line of business accounted for 35.9%, 39.9%, and
42.4% of gross written premiums, net written premiums, and net
earned premiums, respectively.
Within 2001, 2000, and 1999, we eliminated a limited group of
unprofitable programs that were not aligned with our historic
and present business strategy. The uncertainty of future reserve
development on these discontinued programs has been reduced as a
result of aggressive claims handling and reserve strengthening.
However, while we believe we have adequate reserves, there can
be no assurances that there will not be additional losses in the
future relating to these programs. Outstanding reserves related
to these discontinued programs as of December 31, 2006 and
2005, were $5.6 million and $7.4 million, respectively.
In May 2006, we announced the affirmation of A.M. Best
Companys financial strength rating of B++ (Very Good) for
three of our insurance company subsidiaries: Star, Savers, and
Williamsburg. Concurrently, A.M. Best upgraded the rating of our
other insurance company subsidiary, Ameritrust, to B++ (Very
Good), from B+ (Very Good). Additionally, A.M. Best upgraded the
outlook for all the ratings from stable to positive. A positive
outlook is placed on a companys rating if its financial
and market trends are favorable, relative to its current rating
level.
10
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The following table summarizes gross written premiums, net
written premiums, and net earned premiums for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, and 2002 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Written Premiums |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
118,794 |
|
|
$ |
133,732 |
|
|
$ |
146,982 |
|
|
$ |
141,456 |
|
|
$ |
104,822 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril
|
|
|
94,355 |
|
|
|
85,978 |
|
|
|
71,715 |
|
|
|
48,091 |
|
|
|
33,072 |
|
Inland Marine
|
|
|
12,837 |
|
|
|
12,467 |
|
|
|
10,925 |
|
|
|
9,758 |
|
|
|
8,886 |
|
Other Liability
|
|
|
20,001 |
|
|
|
16,167 |
|
|
|
15,248 |
|
|
|
10,473 |
|
|
|
10,442 |
|
Other Commercial Auto Liability
|
|
|
59,308 |
|
|
|
59,144 |
|
|
|
48,070 |
|
|
|
26,902 |
|
|
|
9,894 |
|
Surety Bonds
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2,998 |
|
All Other Lines
|
|
|
25,497 |
|
|
|
24,632 |
|
|
|
20,511 |
|
|
|
16,595 |
|
|
|
13,523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
330,872 |
|
|
$ |
332,209 |
|
|
$ |
313,493 |
|
|
$ |
253,280 |
|
|
$ |
183,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Written Premiums |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
104,846 |
|
|
$ |
117,287 |
|
|
$ |
122,896 |
|
|
$ |
111,572 |
|
|
$ |
90,979 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril
|
|
|
67,504 |
|
|
|
59,870 |
|
|
|
46,351 |
|
|
|
36,628 |
|
|
|
22,375 |
|
Inland Marine
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
|
1,690 |
|
|
|
1,630 |
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
1,587 |
|
Other Liability
|
|
|
12,384 |
|
|
|
8,004 |
|
|
|
7,568 |
|
|
|
6,278 |
|
|
|
4,296 |
|
Other Commercial Auto Liability
|
|
|
52,950 |
|
|
|
49,122 |
|
|
|
37,762 |
|
|
|
19,599 |
|
|
|
9,125 |
|
Surety Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
All Other Lines
|
|
|
23,713 |
|
|
|
22,131 |
|
|
|
17,743 |
|
|
|
14,177 |
|
|
|
11,314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
262,668 |
|
|
$ |
258,134 |
|
|
$ |
233,961 |
|
|
$ |
189,827 |
|
|
$ |
139,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Earned Premiums |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
108,085 |
|
|
$ |
119,423 |
|
|
$ |
117,914 |
|
|
$ |
93,324 |
|
|
$ |
80,795 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril
|
|
|
63,138 |
|
|
|
54,829 |
|
|
|
43,701 |
|
|
|
26,075 |
|
|
|
23,462 |
|
Inland Marine
|
|
|
1,528 |
|
|
|
1,727 |
|
|
|
1,628 |
|
|
|
1,556 |
|
|
|
1,716 |
|
Other Liability
|
|
|
10,433 |
|
|
|
8,072 |
|
|
|
6,416 |
|
|
|
4,849 |
|
|
|
9,325 |
|
Other Commercial Auto Liability
|
|
|
49,341 |
|
|
|
45,373 |
|
|
|
29,274 |
|
|
|
12,940 |
|
|
|
17,548 |
|
Surety Bonds
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
All Other Lines
|
|
|
22,389 |
|
|
|
20,530 |
|
|
|
15,522 |
|
|
|
12,388 |
|
|
|
12,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
$ |
151,205 |
|
|
$ |
145,383 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses and
Reinsurance Recoverables section of Note 1
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and
Note 3 Liability for Losses and Loss
Adjustment Expenses of the Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements, as well as to the Critical Accounting
Estimates section and the Reserves section of
Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis.
11
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The following table shows the development of reserves for unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE) from 1997
through 2006 for our Insurance Company Subsidiaries including
PICL, and the deconsolidation impact of American Indemnity.
Due to our adoption of SFAS 113, the bottom portion of the
table shows the impact of reinsurance for the years 1997 through
2006, reconciling the net reserves shown in the upper portion of
the table to gross reserves.
Analysis of Loss and Loss Adjustment Expense
Development(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
1997 | |
|
1998 | |
|
1999 | |
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves for losses and LAE at end of period
|
|
$ |
60,786 |
|
|
$ |
84,254 |
|
|
$ |
127,500 |
|
|
$ |
172,862 |
|
|
$ |
198,653 |
|
|
$ |
193,116 |
|
|
$ |
192,019 |
|
|
$ |
226,996 |
|
|
$ |
271,423 |
|
|
$ |
302,655 |
|
Deconsolidation of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(147 |
) |
|
|
(1,425 |
) |
|
|
(3,744 |
) |
|
|
(5,572 |
) |
|
|
(2,973 |
) |
|
|
(2,989 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted reserves for losses and LAE at end of period
|
|
$ |
60,786 |
|
|
$ |
84,107 |
|
|
$ |
126,075 |
|
|
$ |
169,118 |
|
|
$ |
193,081 |
|
|
$ |
190,143 |
|
|
$ |
189,030 |
|
|
$ |
226,996 |
|
|
$ |
271,423 |
|
|
$ |
302,655 |
|
Cumulative paid as of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 year
|
|
|
31,368 |
|
|
|
39,195 |
|
|
|
54,928 |
|
|
|
70,952 |
|
|
|
77,038 |
|
|
|
78,023 |
|
|
|
71,427 |
|
|
|
79,056 |
|
|
|
83,271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 years later
|
|
|
47,313 |
|
|
|
56,763 |
|
|
|
90,416 |
|
|
|
115,669 |
|
|
|
130,816 |
|
|
|
122,180 |
|
|
|
118,729 |
|
|
|
124,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 years later
|
|
|
56,848 |
|
|
|
76,776 |
|
|
|
116,001 |
|
|
|
146,548 |
|
|
|
157,663 |
|
|
|
151,720 |
|
|
|
145,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 years later
|
|
|
65,517 |
|
|
|
85,447 |
|
|
|
132,995 |
|
|
|
160,673 |
|
|
|
176,172 |
|
|
|
167,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 years later
|
|
|
68,138 |
|
|
|
93,009 |
|
|
|
139,939 |
|
|
|
171,992 |
|
|
|
186,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 years later
|
|
|
72,063 |
|
|
|
96,739 |
|
|
|
146,997 |
|
|
|
179,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 years later
|
|
|
74,002 |
|
|
|
101,433 |
|
|
|
150,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 years later
|
|
|
76,421 |
|
|
|
104,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 years later
|
|
|
78,363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves re-estimated as of end of year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 year
|
|
|
69,012 |
|
|
|
98,587 |
|
|
|
146,213 |
|
|
|
182,976 |
|
|
|
199,171 |
|
|
|
193,532 |
|
|
|
193,559 |
|
|
|
231,880 |
|
|
|
268,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 years later
|
|
|
73,591 |
|
|
|
106,487 |
|
|
|
144,453 |
|
|
|
186,191 |
|
|
|
205,017 |
|
|
|
196,448 |
|
|
|
203,394 |
|
|
|
227,462 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 years later
|
|
|
74,009 |
|
|
|
102,075 |
|
|
|
152,630 |
|
|
|
189,632 |
|
|
|
207,379 |
|
|
|
202,126 |
|
|
|
205,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 years later
|
|
|
77,771 |
|
|
|
104,017 |
|
|
|
156,997 |
|
|
|
190,305 |
|
|
|
211,394 |
|
|
|
203,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 years later
|
|
|
78,490 |
|
|
|
106,668 |
|
|
|
158,287 |
|
|
|
196,158 |
|
|
|
213,802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 years later
|
|
|
80,084 |
|
|
|
109,038 |
|
|
|
159,449 |
|
|
|
199,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 years later
|
|
|
80,626 |
|
|
|
110,541 |
|
|
|
161,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 years later
|
|
|
81,282 |
|
|
|
112,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 years later
|
|
|
82,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cumulative deficiency:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dollars
|
|
$ |
(21,513 |
) |
|
$ |
(28,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(35,301 |
) |
|
$ |
(30,402 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,721 |
) |
|
$ |
(13,595 |
) |
|
$ |
(16,620 |
) |
|
$ |
(466 |
) |
|
$ |
2,719 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
(35.4 |
)% |
|
|
(33.6 |
)% |
|
|
(28.0 |
)% |
|
|
(18.0 |
)% |
|
|
(10.7 |
)% |
|
|
(7.1 |
)% |
|
|
(8.8 |
)% |
|
|
(0.2 |
)% |
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Net reserves
|
|
|
60,786 |
|
|
|
84,107 |
|
|
|
126,075 |
|
|
|
169,118 |
|
|
|
193,081 |
|
|
|
190,143 |
|
|
|
189,030 |
|
|
|
226,996 |
|
|
|
271,423 |
|
|
|
302,655 |
|
Ceded reserves
|
|
|
38,193 |
|
|
|
64,590 |
|
|
|
101,744 |
|
|
|
168,962 |
|
|
|
195,943 |
|
|
|
181,817 |
|
|
|
147,446 |
|
|
|
151,161 |
|
|
|
187,254 |
|
|
|
198,422 |
|
Gross reserves
|
|
|
98,979 |
|
|
|
148,697 |
|
|
|
227,819 |
|
|
|
338,080 |
|
|
|
389,024 |
|
|
|
371,960 |
|
|
|
336,476 |
|
|
|
378,157 |
|
|
|
458,677 |
|
|
|
501,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net re-estimated
|
|
|
82,299 |
|
|
|
112,340 |
|
|
|
161,376 |
|
|
|
199,520 |
|
|
|
213,802 |
|
|
|
203,738 |
|
|
|
205,650 |
|
|
|
227,462 |
|
|
|
268,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded re-estimated
|
|
|
62,366 |
|
|
|
108,578 |
|
|
|
178,470 |
|
|
|
260,673 |
|
|
|
284,885 |
|
|
|
254,290 |
|
|
|
243,502 |
|
|
|
205,843 |
|
|
|
205,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross re-estimated
|
|
|
144,665 |
|
|
|
220,918 |
|
|
|
339,846 |
|
|
|
460,193 |
|
|
|
498,687 |
|
|
|
458,028 |
|
|
|
449,152 |
|
|
|
433,305 |
|
|
|
474,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross cumulative deficiency
|
|
$ |
(45,686 |
) |
|
$ |
(72,221 |
) |
|
$ |
(112,027 |
) |
|
$ |
(122,113 |
) |
|
$ |
(109,663 |
) |
|
$ |
(86,068 |
) |
|
$ |
(112,676 |
) |
|
$ |
(55,148 |
) |
|
$ |
(15,503 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
In accordance with FIN 46(R), we performed an evaluation of
our business relationships and determined our wholly owned
subsidiary, American Indemnity, did not meet the tests for
consolidation, as neither us, nor our subsidiary Star, are the
primary beneficiaries of American Indemnity. Therefore,
effective January 1, 2004, we deconsolidated American
Indemnity on a prospective basis in accordance with the
provisions of FIN 46(R). Accordingly, we have adjusted the
reserves and development within the above table. The adoption of
FIN 46(R) and the deconsolidation of American Indemnity did
not have a material impact on our consolidated balance sheet or
consolidated statement of income. |
12
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
The following table sets forth the difference between generally
accepted accounting principles (GAAP) reserves for
loss and loss adjustment expenses and statutory reserves for
loss and loss adjustment expenses at December 31, (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
GAAP reserves for losses and LAE
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
Reinsurance recoverables for unpaid losses
|
|
|
(198,422 |
) |
|
|
(187,254 |
) |
Allowances against reinsurance recoverables**
|
|
|
(1,041 |
) |
|
|
(1,080 |
) |
Non-regulated foreign insurance subsidiary; PICL***
|
|
|
(1,273 |
) |
|
|
(1,230 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statutory reserves for losses and LAE
|
|
$ |
300,341 |
|
|
$ |
269,113 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
For the year ended December 31, 2006, we reported an
increase of $15.5 million in gross ultimate loss estimates
for accident years 2005 and prior, or 3.4% of
$458.7 million of gross losses and LAE reserves at
January 1, 2006. We reported a $2.7 million decrease
in net ultimate losses and LAE estimates for accident years 2005
and prior, or 1.0% of $271.4 million. The change in gross
ultimate loss estimates for accident years 2005 and prior is
greater than the change in net ultimate loss estimates as a
result of gross development on a small number of large
workers compensation claims. |
|
|
** |
The GAAP allowance for reinsurance recoverables is reported as a
Schedule F penalty or a non-admitted asset for statutory
accounting. |
|
|
*** |
PICL offers clients captive or rent-a-captive options. It is not
a domestic insurance company and, therefore, is not included in
the combined statutory financial statements filed with the
National Association of Insurance Commissioners and state
regulators. |
As a result of favorable development on prior accident
years reserves, the provision for losses and loss
adjustment expenses decreased by $2.7 million for calendar
year 2006. As a result of adverse development on prior accident
years reserves, the provision for losses and loss
adjustment expenses increased by $4.9 million and
$4.5 million in calendar years 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Investments
Certain information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to Note 2 Investments of the
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, and the
Investments section of Item 7, Managements
Discussion and Analysis.
Competition and Pricing
We compete with other providers of risk management programs and
services, as well as, with traditional providers of commercial
insurance. Both the risk management and the traditional property
and casualty insurance markets are highly competitive. Our risk
management programs and services compete with products and
services offered by insurance companies, other providers of risk
management services (including domestic and foreign insurers and
reinsurers and insurance agents), as well as with self-insurance
plans, captives managed by others, and a variety of other
risk-financing vehicles and mechanisms. These competitive
products are offered by other companies that may have greater
financial resources than we do. Our agency operations compete
with other local, regional, and national insurance agencies for
individual client insurance needs.
The market for risk management products and services is
significantly influenced by market conditions affecting the
traditional property and casualty insurance industry. Insurance
market conditions historically have been subject to significant
variability due to premium rate competition, natural disasters
and other catastrophic events, judicial trends, changes in the
investment and interest rate environment, regulation, and
general economic conditions. Pricing is a primary means of
competition in the commercial insurance market. Competition is
also based on the availability and quality of products, quality
and speed of service (including claims service), financial
strength, ratings, distribution systems and technical expertise.
The primary basis for competition among risk management
providers varies with the financial and insurance needs and
resources of each potential insured. Principle factors that are
considered by insureds include an analysis of the net
13
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
present-value (after-tax) of the cost of financing the
insureds expected level of losses; the amount of excess
coverage provided in the event losses exceed expected levels;
cash flow and tax planning considerations; and the expected
quality and consistency of the services to be provided. We
believe that we are able to compete based on our experience, the
quality of our products and services, and our program-oriented
approach. However, our ability to successfully compete is
dependent upon a number of factors, including market and
competitive conditions, many of which are outside of our control.
Regulation
Insurance Company Regulation
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are subject to regulation by
government agencies in the states in which they do business. The
nature and extent of such regulation varies from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction but typically involves:
|
|
|
|
|
prior approval of the acquisition of control of an insurance
company or of any company controlling an insurance company; |
|
|
|
regulation of certain transactions entered into by an insurance
company with any of its affiliates; |
|
|
|
approval of premium rates, forms and policies used for many
lines of insurance; |
|
|
|
standards of solvency and minimum amounts of capital and surplus
which must be maintained; |
|
|
|
establishment of reserves required to be maintained for unearned
premium, loss and loss adjustment expense, or for other purposes; |
|
|
|
limitations on types and amounts of investments; |
|
|
|
restrictions on the size of risks that may be insured by a
single company; |
|
|
|
licensing of insurers and agents; |
|
|
|
deposits of securities for the benefit of policyholders; and |
|
|
|
the filing of periodic reports with respect to financial
condition and other matters. |
In addition, state regulatory examiners perform periodic
examinations of insurance companies. Such regulation is
generally intended for the protection of policyholders, rather
than security holders.
|
|
|
Holding Company Regulatory Acts |
In addition to the regulatory oversight of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries, we are subject to regulation under the Michigan,
Missouri, California, and Florida Insurance Holding Company
System Regulatory Acts (the Holding Company Acts).
The Holding Company Acts contain certain reporting requirements
including those that require us to file information relating to
our capital structure, ownership, and financial condition and
general business operations of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. The Holding Company Acts contain special reporting
and prior approval requirements with respect to transactions
among affiliates.
|
|
|
Various State and Federal Regulation |
Insurance companies are also affected by a variety of state and
federal legislative and regulatory measures and judicial
decisions that define and extend the risks and benefits for
which insurance is sought and provided. These include
redefinition of risk exposure in areas such as product
liability, environmental damage, and workers compensation.
In addition, individual state insurance departments may prevent
premium rates for some classes of insureds from reflecting the
level of risk assumed by the insurer for those classes. Such
developments may adversely affect the profitability of various
lines of insurance. In some cases, these adverse
14
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
effects on profitability can be minimized through repricing, if
permitted by applicable regulations, of coverages or limitations
or cessation of the affected business.
Our reinsurance intermediary is also subject to regulation.
Under applicable regulations, the intermediary is responsible,
as a fiduciary, for funds received on account of the parties to
the reinsurance transaction and is required to hold such funds
in appropriate bank accounts subject to restrictions on
withdrawals and prohibitions on commingling.
|
|
|
Licensing and Agency Contracts |
We, or certain of our designated employees, must be licensed to
act as agents by state regulatory authorities in the states in
which we conduct business. Regulations and licensing laws vary
in individual states and are often complex.
The applicable licensing laws and regulations in all states are
subject to amendment or reinterpretation by state regulatory
authorities, and such authorities are vested in most cases with
relatively broad discretion as to the granting, revocation,
suspension and renewal of licenses. The possibility exists that
we, or our employees, could be excluded, or temporarily
suspended, from continuing with some or all of our activities
in, or otherwise subjected to penalties by, a particular state.
Insurance Regulation Concerning Change or Acquisition of
Control
Star, Savers, Williamsburg and Ameritrust are domestic property
and casualty insurance companies organized under the insurance
laws (the Insurance Codes) of Michigan, Missouri,
California, and Florida, respectively. The Insurance Codes
provide that acquisition or change of control of a domestic
insurer or of any person that controls a domestic insurer cannot
be consummated without the prior approval of the relevant
insurance regulatory authority. A person seeking to acquire
control, directly or indirectly, of a domestic insurance company
or of any person controlling a domestic insurance company must
generally file with the relevant insurance regulatory authority
an application for change of control (commonly known as a
Form A) containing information required by
statute and published regulations and provide a copy of such
Form A to the domestic insurer. In Michigan, Missouri,
California, and Florida, control is generally presumed to exist
if any person, directly or indirectly, owns, controls, holds
with the power to vote or holds proxies representing ten percent
or more of the voting securities of the company.
In addition, many state insurance regulatory laws contain
provisions that require pre-notification to state agencies of a
change in control of a non-domestic admitted insurance company
in that state. While such pre-notification statutes do not
authorize the state agency to disapprove the change of control,
such statutes do authorize issuance of a cease and desist order
with respect to the non-domestic admitted insurer if certain
conditions exist, such as undue market concentration.
Any future transactions that would constitute a change in
control would also generally require prior approval by the
Insurance Departments of Michigan, Missouri, California, and
Florida and would require pre-acquisition notification in those
states that have adopted pre-acquisition notification provisions
and in which the insurers are admitted. Such requirements may
deter, delay or prevent certain transactions that could be
advantageous to our shareholders.
Membership in Insolvency Funds and Associations and Mandatory
Pools
Most states require admitted property and casualty insurers to
become members of insolvency funds or associations, which
generally protect policyholders against the insolvency of such
insurers. Members of the fund or association must contribute to
the payment of certain claims made against insolvent insurers.
Maximum contributions required by law in any one year vary
between 1% and 2% of annual premium written
15
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
by a member in that state. Assessments from insolvency funds
were $288,000, $664,000, and $784,000, respectively, for 2006,
2005, and 2004. Most of these payments are recoverable through
future policy surcharges and premium tax reductions.
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are also required to
participate in various mandatory insurance facilities or in
funding mandatory pools, which are generally designed to provide
insurance coverage for consumers who are unable to obtain
insurance in the voluntary insurance market. Among the pools
participated in are those established in certain states to
provide windstorm and other similar types of property coverage.
These pools typically require all companies writing applicable
lines of insurance in the state for which the pool has been
established to fund deficiencies experienced by the pool based
upon each companys relative premium writings in that
state, with any excess funding typically distributed to the
participating companies on the same basis. To the extent that
reinsurance treaties do not cover these assessments, they may
adversely affect us. Total assessments paid to all such
facilities were $2.9 million, $3.0 million, and
$2.3 million, respectively, for 2006, 2005, and 2004.
Restrictions on Dividends and Risk-Based Capital
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to Note 8 Regulatory Matters and
Rating Issues of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements and the Regulatory and Rating Issues section
within Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis.
Effect of Federal Legislation
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (TRIA)
established a program under which the United States federal
government will provide governmental support for businesses that
suffer damages from certain acts of international terrorism. In
December 2005 under the Terrorism Risk Extension Act of 2005,
TRIA was modified and extended through December 31, 2007.
TRIA serves as an additional high layer of reinsurance against
losses that may arise from a domestic incident by foreign
groups. The impact to us resulting from TRIA is minimal as we do
not underwrite risks that are considered targets for terrorism;
avoid concentration of exposures in both property and
workers compensation; and have terrorism coverage included
in our reinsurance treaties to cover the most likely exposure.
NAIC-IRIS Ratios
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) Insurance Regulatory Information System
(IRIS) was developed by a committee of state
insurance regulators and is primarily intended to assist state
insurance departments in executing their statutory mandates to
oversee the financial condition of insurance companies operating
in their respective states. IRIS identifies thirteen industry
ratios and specifies usual values for each ratio.
Departure from the usual values on four or more ratios generally
leads to inquiries or possible further review from individual
state insurance commissioners. Refer to the Regulatory and
Rating Issues section of Item 7, Managements
Discussion and Analysis.
Available Information
Our Internet address is www.meadowbrook.com. There we
make available, free of charge, our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q, current
reports on
Form 8-K,
statements of beneficial ownership (Forms 3, 4, and
5), and any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonable
practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnished to, the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). You may read and copy materials we
file with the SEC at the SECs Public Reference Room at
101 F Street, NW, Washington D.C., 20549. You may
obtain information about the operation of the Public Reference
Room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330. In
addition, the SEC maintains an internet site that contains
reports, proxy statements, and other information that we file at
www.sec.gov. Our SEC reports can also be accessed through
the investor relations section of our website. The
16
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
information found on our website is not part of this or any
other report we file with, or furnished to the SEC. The Charters
of the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Compensation
Committee, the Audit Committee, the Finance Committee, and the
Investment Committee of our Board of Directors, are also
available on our website, or available in print to any
shareholder who requests this information. In addition, our
Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Conduct, and our
Business Conduct Policy are available on our website, or in
print to any shareholder who requests this information.
Corporate Governance Listing Standards
On June 1, 2006, the Company submitted to the New York
Stock Exchange a certificate signed by its Chief Executive
Officer certifying that he was not aware of any violation by the
Company of New York Stock Exchanges corporate governance
listing standards.
|
|
|
If our reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses
are not adequate, we will have to increase our reserves, which
would result in reductions in net income, retained earnings, and
statutory surplus, along with ability to pay dividends. |
We establish reserves for losses and expenses related to the
adjustment of losses under the insurance policies we write. We
determine the amount of these reserves based on our best
estimate and judgment of the losses and costs we will incur on
existing insurance policies. Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries
obtain an annual statement of opinion from an independent
actuary firm on these reserves. While we believe our reserves
are adequate, we base these reserves on assumptions about past
and future events. The following factors could have a
substantial impact on our future loss experience:
|
|
|
|
|
the amounts of claims settlements and awards; |
|
|
|
legislative activity; and |
|
|
|
changes in inflation and economic conditions. |
Actual losses and the costs we incur related to the adjustment
of losses under insurance policies may be different from the
amount of reserves we establish. When we increase reserves, our
net income for the period will decrease by a corresponding
amount.
|
|
|
Our performance is dependent on the continued services and
performance of our senior management and other key
personnel. |
The success of our business is dependent on our ability to
retain and motivate our senior management and key management
personnel. The loss of the services of any of our executive
officers or other key employees could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition, and results of
operations. We have existing employment agreements with some of
our executive officers. We maintain key person life
insurance policies on our key personnel.
Our future success also will depend on our ability to attract,
train, motivate and retain other highly skilled technical,
managerial, marketing, and customer service personnel.
Competition for these employees is intense and we may not be
able to successfully attract, integrate or retain sufficiently
qualified personnel. In addition, our future success depends on
our ability to attract, retain and motivate our agents. Our
failure to attract and retain the necessary personnel and agents
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, and results of operations.
17
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
|
|
|
If market conditions cause our reinsurance to be more
costly or unavailable, we may be required to bear increased
risks or reduce the level of our underwriting
commitments. |
As part of our overall risk and capacity management strategy, we
purchase reinsurance for significant amounts of risk
underwritten by our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, especially
for the excess-of-loss
and severity risks. Market conditions beyond our control
determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance we
purchase, which may affect the level of our business and
profitability. Our reinsurance facilities are generally subject
to annual renewal. We may be unable to maintain our current
reinsurance facilities or to obtain other reinsurance in
adequate amounts and at favorable rates. If we are unable to
renew our expiring facilities or to obtain new reinsurance,
either our net exposure to risk would increase or, if we are
unwilling to bear an increase in net risk exposures, we would
have to reduce the amount of risk we underwrite.
|
|
|
We cannot guarantee that our reinsurers will pay in a
timely fashion, if at all, and as a result, could adversely
affect our business, results of operations and financial
condition. |
We transfer some of the risk we have assumed to reinsurance
companies in exchange for a portion of the premium we receive in
connection with the risk. Although reinsurance makes the
reinsurer liable to us to the extent the risk is transferred, it
does not relieve us of our original liability to the
policyholders. Our reinsurers may not pay the reinsurance
recoverables they owe us or they may not pay on a timely basis.
If our reinsurers fail to pay us or fail to pay us on a timely
basis, our financial results could be adversely affected.
|
|
|
Our results may fluctuate as a result of many factors,
including cyclical changes in the insurance industry. |
The results of companies in the property and casualty insurance
industry historically have been subject to significant
fluctuations and uncertainties. Our industrys
profitability can be affected by:
|
|
|
|
|
rising levels of actual costs that are not known by companies at
the time they price their products; |
|
|
|
volatile and unpredictable developments, including man-made,
weather-related and other natural catastrophes or terrorist
attacks; |
|
|
|
changes in loss reserves resulting from the general claims and
legal environments as different types of claims arise and
judicial interpretations relating to the scope of insurers
liability develop; |
|
|
|
fluctuations in interest rates, inflationary pressures and other
changes in the investment environment, which affect returns on
invested assets and may impact the ultimate payout of
losses; and |
|
|
|
increase in medical costs beyond historic or expected annual
inflationary levels. |
The demand for property and casualty insurance can also vary
significantly, rising as the overall level of economic activity
increases and falling as that activity decreases. The property
and casualty insurance industry historically is cyclical in
nature. These fluctuations in demand and competition could
produce underwriting results that would have a negative impact
on our financial condition and results of operations.
|
|
|
We face competitive pressures in our business that could
cause demand for our products to fall and adversely affect our
profitability. |
We compete with a large number of other companies in our
selected lines of business. We compete, and will continue to
compete, with major United States, foreign, and other regional
insurers, as well as mutual companies, specialty insurance
companies, underwriting agencies, and diversified financial
services companies. Many of our competitors have greater
financial and marketing resources than we do. Our profitability
could be adversely affected if we lose business to competitors
offering similar or better products at or below our prices. In
addition, a number of new, proposed or potential legislative or
industry developments could further increase competition in our
industry. New competition from these developments could cause
the demand for our products to fall, which could adversely
affect our profitability.
18
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
A number of new, proposed or potential legislative or industry
developments could further increase competition in our industry.
These developments include:
|
|
|
|
|
the formation of new insurers and an influx of new capital in
the marketplace as existing companies attempt to expand their
business as a result of better pricing and/or terms; |
|
|
|
programs in which state-sponsored entities provide property
insurance in catastrophe-prone areas or other alternative market
types of coverage; and |
|
|
|
changing practices created by the internet, which has increased
competition within the insurance business. |
These developments could make the property and casualty
insurance marketplace more competitive by increasing the supply
of insurance capacity. In that event, recent favorable industry
trends could be reversed and may negatively influence our
ability to maintain or increase rates. Accordingly, these
developments could have an adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
|
|
|
Because we are heavily regulated by the states in which we
operate, we may be limited in the way we operate. |
We are subject to extensive supervision and regulation in the
states in which we operate. The supervision and regulation
relate to numerous aspects of our business and financial
condition. The primary purpose of the supervision and regulation
is to maintain compliance with insurance regulations, protect
policyholders and not our shareholders. The extent of regulation
varies, but generally is governed by state statutes. These
statutes delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative
authority to state insurance departments. This system of
regulation covers, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
standards of solvency, including risk-based capital measurements; |
|
|
|
restrictions on the nature, quality and concentration of
investments; |
|
|
|
restrictions on the types of terms that we can include in the
insurance policies we offer; |
|
|
|
required methods of accounting; |
|
|
|
reserves for unearned premiums, losses and other
purposes; and |
|
|
|
potential assessments for the provision of funds necessary for
the settlement of covered claims under certain insurance
policies provided by impaired, insolvent or failed insurance
companies. |
The regulations of the state insurance departments may affect
the cost or demand for our products and may impede us from
obtaining rate increases or taking other actions we might wish
to take to increase our profitability. Furthermore, we may be
unable to maintain all required licenses and approvals and our
business may not fully comply with the wide variety of
applicable laws and regulations or the relevant authoritys
interpretation of the laws and regulations. Also, regulatory
authorities have relatively broad discretion to grant, renew or
revoke licenses and approvals. If we do not have the requisite
licenses and approvals or do not comply with applicable
regulatory requirements, the insurance regulatory authorities
could stop or temporarily suspend us from conducting some or all
of our activities or monetarily penalize us.
|
|
|
We could be forced to sell investments to meet our
liquidity requirements. |
We believe that we maintain adequate amounts of cash and
short-term investments to pay claims, and do not expect to have
to sell securities prematurely for such purposes. We may,
however, decide to sell securities as a result of changes in
interest rates, credit quality, the rate or repayment or other
similar factors. A significant increase in market interest rates
could result in a situation in which we are required to sell
securities at depressed prices to fund payments to our insureds.
Since we carry debt securities at fair value, we expect these
securities would be sold with no material impact on our net
equity, although it could result in net
19
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
realized losses. If these securities are sold, future net
investment income may be reduced if we are unable to reinvest in
securities with similar yields.
|
|
|
Because our investment portfolio consists primarily of
fixed income securities, our investment income could suffer as a
result of fluctuations in interest rates and market
conditions. |
We currently maintain and intend to continue to maintain an
investment portfolio consisting primarily of fixed income
securities. The fair value of these securities fluctuates
depending on changes in interest rates. Generally, the fair
market value of these investments increases or decreases in an
inverse relationship with changes in interest rates, while net
investment income earned by us from future investments in fixed
income securities will generally increase or decrease with
interest rates. Changes in interest rates may result in
fluctuations in the income derived from, and the valuation of,
our fixed income investments, which could have an adverse effect
on our financial condition and results of operations.
|
|
|
We are subject to credit risk with respect to the
obligations of our reinsurers and the payment of claims by our
clients captive, rent-a-captive, large deductible
programs, indemnification agreements, or on the portion of risk
either ceded to the captives, or retained by our clients. The
inability of our risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations
could adversely affect our profitability. |
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries cede insurance to other
insurers under pro rata and
excess-of-loss
contracts. These reinsurance arrangements diversify our business
and minimize our exposure to large losses or from hazards of an
unusual nature. The ceding of insurance does not discharge the
original insurer from its primary liability to its policyholder.
If all or any of the reinsuring companies are unable to meet
their obligations, we would be liable for such defaulted
amounts. Therefore, we are subject to a credit risk with respect
to the obligations of our reinsurers. In order to minimize our
exposure to significant losses from reinsurer insolvencies, we
evaluate the financial condition of our reinsurers and monitor
the economic characteristics of the reinsurers on an ongoing
basis.
In addition, with our risk-sharing programs, we are subject to
credit risk with respect to the payment of claims by our
clients captive, rent-a-captive, large deductible
programs, indemnification agreements, or on the portion of risk
either ceded to the captives, or retained by our clients. The
capitalization and credit worthiness of prospective risk-sharing
partners is one of the factors we consider upon entering into
and renewing risk-sharing programs. Generally, we collateralize
balances due from our risk-sharing partners through funds
withheld trusts or stand-by letters of credit issued by highly
rated banks. To date, we have not, in the aggregate, experienced
material difficulties in collecting balances from our
risk-sharing partners. No assurance can be given, however,
regarding the future ability of any of our risk-sharing partners
to meet their obligations. The inability of our risk-sharing
partners to meet their obligations could adversely affect our
profitability.
|
|
|
Provisions of the Michigan Business Corporation Act, our
articles of incorporation and other corporate governing
documents and the insurance laws of Michigan, Missouri,
California, and Florida may discourage takeover attempts. |
The Michigan Business Corporation Act contains
anti-takeover provisions. Chapter 7A and 7B of
the Business Corporation Act apply to us and may have an
anti-takeover effect and may delay, defer or prevent a tender
offer or takeover attempt that a shareholder might consider in
their best interest, including those attempts that might result
in shareholders receiving a premium over market price for their
shares.
Our articles of incorporation allow our Board of Directors to
issue one or more classes or series of preferred stock with
voting rights, preferences and other privileges as our Board of
Directors may determine. Also, we have adopted a shareholder
rights plan which if triggered would significantly dilute the
stock ownership percentage of anyone who acquires more than
fifteen percent of our shares without the approval of our Board
of Directors. The existence of our shareholder rights plan and
the possible issuance of preferred
20
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
shares could adversely affect the holders of our common stock
and could prevent, delay or defer a change of control.
We are also subject to the laws of various states, such as
Michigan, Missouri, California, and Florida, governing insurance
holding companies. Under these laws, a person generally must
obtain the applicable Insurance Departments approval to
acquire, directly or indirectly, five to ten percent or more of
the outstanding voting securities of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. An Insurance Departments determination of
whether to approve an acquisition would be based on a variety of
factors, including an evaluation of the acquirors
financial stability, the competence of its management, and
whether competition in that state would be reduced. These laws
may prevent, delay or defer a change of control of us or our
Insurance Company Subsidiaries.
|
|
|
If our financial strength ratings are reduced, we may be
adversely impacted. |
Insurance companies are subject to financial strength ratings
produced by external rating agencies. Higher ratings generally
indicate greater financial stability and a stronger ability to
pay claims. Ratings are assigned by rating agencies to insurers
based upon factors they believe are important to policyholders.
Ratings are not recommendations to buy, hold, or sell our
securities.
Our ability to write business is most influenced by our rating
from A.M. Best. A.M. Best ratings are designed to assess an
insurers financial strength and ability to meet continuing
obligations to policyholders. Currently, our rating from A.M.
Best is B++ (Very Good) with a positive outlook for Star
Insurance Company, Savers Property and Casualty Insurance
Company, Williamsburg National Insurance Company, and Ameritrust
Insurance Corporation. A positive outlook is placed on a
companys rating if its financial and market trends are
favorable, relative to its current rating level. We believe as a
result of our improved balance sheet and operating performance
our rating will remain at least at its current level, if not at
an upgraded level. However, there can be no assurance that A.M.
Best will not change its rating in the future. A rating
downgrade from A.M. Best could materially adversely affect the
business we write and our results of operations.
|
|
|
Most states assess our Insurance Company Subsidiaries to
provide funds for failing insurance companies and those
assessments could be material. |
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are subject to assessments in
most states where we are licensed for the provision of funds
necessary for the settlement of covered claims under certain
policies provided by impaired, insolvent or failed insurance
companies. Maximum contributions required by law in any one year
vary between 1% and 2% of annual premiums written by a member in
that state. We cannot predict with certainty the amount of
future assessments. Significant assessments could have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations.
|
|
|
We rely on our information technology and
telecommunications systems to conduct our business. |
Our business is dependent upon the uninterrupted functioning of
our information technology and telecommunication systems. We
rely upon our systems, as well as the systems of our vendors to
underwrite and process our business, make claim payments,
provide customer service, provide policy administration
services, such as, endorsements, cancellations and premium
collections, comply with insurance regulatory requirements and
perform actuarial and other analytical functions necessary for
pricing and product development. Our operations are dependent
upon our ability to timely and efficiently process our business
and protect our information and telecommunications systems from
physical loss, telecommunications failure or other similar
catastrophic events, as well as from security breaches. While we
have implemented business contingency plans and other reasonable
and appropriate internal controls to protect our systems from
interruption, loss or security breaches, a sustained business
interruption or system failure could adversely impact our
ability to process our business, provide customer service, pay
claims in a timely manner or perform
21
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
other necessary business functions. Likewise, a security breach
of our computer systems could also interrupt or damage our
operations or harm our reputation in the event confidential
customer information is disclosed to third-parties. Either of
these circumstances could have a material adverse effect upon
our financial condition, operations or reputation.
|
|
|
Managing technology initiatives and obtaining the
efficiencies anticipated with technology implementation may
present significant challenges. |
While technological enhancements and initiatives can streamline
several business processes and ultimately reduce the costs of
operations, these initiatives can present short-term costs and
implementation risks. Projections of associated costs,
implementation timelines, and the benefits of the enhancements
may be inaccurate and could escalate over time. In addition,
there could be risks associated with not achieving the
anticipated efficiencies with technology implementation that
could adversely impact our results of operations.
|
|
Item 1B. |
Unresolved Staff Comments |
None.
In 1998, we purchased land in Southfield, Michigan for a cost of
$3.2 million. In 2004, the construction of our corporate
headquarters was completed on half of this land. In December
2004, we relocated to the new office building. This new building
is approximately 72,000 square feet. The total construction
cost of the building approximated $12.0 million, which was
paid in full at the closing on January 19, 2005.
Previously, we leased our corporate offices from an unaffiliated
third party.
In 2003, we entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement, whereby
we agreed to sell the remaining portion of the land to an
unaffiliated third party for the purpose of constructing an
office building adjacent to our corporate headquarters. Under
the Purchase and Sale Agreement, the third party agreed to pay
$2.1 million for the land, $1.2 million for their
share of the costs related to the common areas of the building,
and other related costs of approximately $226,000. In May 2005,
we closed on the transaction.
Through our subsidiaries, we are also a party to various leases
for locations in which we have offices. We do not consider any
of these leases to be material.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
We are subject at times to various claims, lawsuits and
proceedings relating principally to alleged errors or omissions
in the placement of insurance, claims administration, consulting
services and other business transactions arising in the ordinary
course of business. Where appropriate, we vigorously defend such
claims, lawsuits and proceedings. Some of these claims, lawsuits
and proceedings seek damages, including consequential, exemplary
or punitive damages, in amounts that could, if awarded, be
significant. Most of the claims, lawsuits and proceedings
arising in the ordinary course of business are covered by errors
and omissions insurance or other appropriate insurance. In terms
of deductibles associated with such insurance, we have
established provisions against these items, which are believed
to be adequate in light of current information and legal advice.
In accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, if it is probable that an asset has
been impaired or a liability has been incurred as of the date of
the financial statements and the amount of loss is estimable, an
accrual is provided for the costs to resolve these claims in our
consolidated financial statements. Period expenses related to
the defense of such claims are included in other operating
expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of income.
With the assistance of outside counsel, we adjust such
provisions according to new developments or changes in the
strategy in dealing with such matters. On the basis of current
information, we do not expect the outcome of the claims,
lawsuits and proceedings to which we are subject to, either
individually, or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse
effect on our
22
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
financial condition. However, it is possible that future results
of operations or cash flows for any particular quarter or annual
period could be materially affected by an unfavorable resolution
of any such matters.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of
Security Holders
None.
23
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrants Common
Equity and Related Stockholder Matters
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholder Information
Corporate Headquarters
26255 American Drive
Southfield, MI 48034-6112
Phone: (248) 358-1100
Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm
Ernst & Young LLP
Detroit, MI
Corporate Counsel
Howard & Howard Attorneys, P.C.
Bloomfield Hills, MI |
|
Transfer Agent & Registrar
LaSalle Bank National Association
Corporate Trust Shareholder Services
P.O. Box 3319
South Hackensack, NJ 07606-1919
Stock Listing
New York Stock Exchange
Symbol: MIG |
|
Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of
Meadowbrook Shareholders
will be held at:
2:00 p.m.
May 9, 2007
Corporate Headquarters
26255 American Drive
Southfield, MI |
Shareholder Relations and
Form 10-K
A copy of our 2006 Annual Report and
Form 10-K, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, may be
obtained upon written request to our Investor Relations
Department at our corporate headquarters, or contact:
|
|
|
Karen M. Spaun, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
(248) 204-8178 karen.spaun@meadowbrook.com |
|
|
Holly A. Moltane, Director of External Financial Reporting |
|
(248) 204-8590 holly.moltane@meadowbrook.com |
Direct Investment Plan
Our Shareholder Investment Plan (Plan) offers a
simple and systematic way to purchase our common stock without
paying brokerage fees or commissions. With the Plans many
flexible features, an account may be customized to reflect
individual financial and investment objectives. If you would
like additional information including a prospectus and an
application, please contact:
LaSalle Bank National Association
1-800-442-8134
Share Price and Dividend Information
The following table sets forth for the periods indicated, the
high and low closing sale prices of our common shares as
reported on the NYSE Composite Tape, and quarterly dividends
paid for the years ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006 |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
Dividends | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
7.00 |
|
|
$ |
5.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
8.91 |
|
|
|
6.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
11.83 |
|
|
|
8.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
12.48 |
|
|
|
8.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
Dividends | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
5.89 |
|
|
$ |
4.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
5.53 |
|
|
|
5.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
5.72 |
|
|
|
5.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
6.77 |
|
|
|
5.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
24
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
For additional information regarding dividend restrictions,
refer to the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of
Managements Discussion and Analysis.
When evaluating the declaration of a dividend, our Board of
Directors considers a variety of factors, including but not
limited to, our cash flow, liquidity needs, results of
operations and our overall financial condition. As a holding
company, the ability to pay cash dividends is partially
dependent on dividends and other permitted payments from its
subsidiaries. We did not receive any dividends from our
Insurance Company Subsidiaries in 2006 or 2005.
Shareholders of Record
As of March 2, 2007, there were approximately
267 shareholders of record of our common stock. For
purposes of this determination, Cede & Co., the nominee
for the Depositary Trust Company is treated as one holder.
Issuer Repurchases of Common Stock
During the year ended December 31, 2006, we did not
purchase any of our securities.
25
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
Performance Graph
The following graph sets forth, for the five year period ended
December 31, 2006, the cumulative total stockholder return
for the Companys common stock, the Russell 2000 Index, and
a Peer Group index. The graph assumes the investment of $100 on
December 31, 2001 in Common Stock of the Company, the
Russell 2000 Index, and a Peer Group index. The stock price
performance represented on the following graph is not
necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.
The performance graph shall not be deemed soliciting
material or to be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission, nor shall such information be deemed to
be incorporated by reference into any future filing of the
Company under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 or Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, except to the extent the
Company specifically incorporates it by reference into such
filing.
Comparison of Five Year Cumulative Total Return
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Period Ending | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Index |
|
|
12/31/01 |
|
|
12/31/02 |
|
|
12/31/03 |
|
|
12/31/04 |
|
|
12/31/05 |
|
|
12/31/06 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
124.62 |
|
|
|
|
212.56 |
|
|
|
|
250.75 |
|
|
|
|
293.47 |
|
|
|
|
496.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell 2000
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
79.52 |
|
|
|
|
117.09 |
|
|
|
|
138.55 |
|
|
|
|
144.86 |
|
|
|
|
171.47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SNL $500M-$1B Insurance Asset-Size Index
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
108.29 |
|
|
|
|
150.14 |
|
|
|
|
182.54 |
|
|
|
|
165.27 |
|
|
|
|
180.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share and | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ratio data) | |
|
|
Income Statement Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross written premiums
|
|
$ |
330,872 |
|
|
$ |
332,209 |
|
|
$ |
313,493 |
|
|
$ |
253,280 |
|
|
$ |
183,637 |
|
Net written premiums
|
|
|
262,668 |
|
|
|
258,134 |
|
|
|
233,961 |
|
|
|
189,827 |
|
|
|
139,795 |
|
Net earned premiums
|
|
|
254,920 |
|
|
|
249,959 |
|
|
|
214,493 |
|
|
|
151,205 |
|
|
|
145,383 |
|
Net commissions and fees
|
|
|
41,172 |
|
|
|
35,916 |
|
|
|
40,535 |
|
|
|
45,291 |
|
|
|
37,581 |
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
22,075 |
|
|
|
17,975 |
|
|
|
14,911 |
|
|
|
13,484 |
|
|
|
13,958 |
|
Net realized gains
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
666 |
|
Gain on sale of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
199 |
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
318,236 |
|
|
|
304,017 |
|
|
|
270,278 |
|
|
|
210,803 |
|
|
|
197,787 |
|
Net losses and LAE(1)
|
|
|
146,293 |
|
|
|
151,542 |
|
|
|
135,938 |
|
|
|
98,472 |
|
|
|
98,734 |
|
Policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses(1)
|
|
|
50,479 |
|
|
|
44,439 |
|
|
|
33,424 |
|
|
|
23,606 |
|
|
|
33,573 |
|
Other administrative expenses
|
|
|
29,414 |
|
|
|
27,183 |
|
|
|
25,964 |
|
|
|
23,232 |
|
|
|
22,612 |
|
Salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
54,569 |
|
|
|
51,331 |
|
|
|
52,297 |
|
|
|
48,238 |
|
|
|
37,659 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
5,976 |
|
|
|
3,856 |
|
|
|
2,281 |
|
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
3,021 |
|
Gain on debt reduction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
Income before income taxes and equity earnings
|
|
|
31,505 |
|
|
|
25,666 |
|
|
|
20,374 |
|
|
|
16,278 |
|
|
|
2,547 |
|
Equity earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
22,034 |
|
|
|
17,910 |
|
|
|
14,061 |
|
|
|
10,099 |
|
|
|
1,650 |
|
Earnings per share Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.75 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
$ |
0.35 |
|
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments and cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
527,600 |
|
|
$ |
460,233 |
|
|
$ |
402,156 |
|
|
$ |
324,235 |
|
|
$ |
286,050 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
969,000 |
|
|
|
901,344 |
|
|
|
801,696 |
|
|
|
692,266 |
|
|
|
674,839 |
|
Loss and LAE reserves
|
|
|
501,077 |
|
|
|
458,677 |
|
|
|
378,157 |
|
|
|
339,465 |
|
|
|
374,933 |
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
12,144 |
|
|
|
17,506 |
|
|
|
32,497 |
|
Debentures
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
|
35,310 |
|
|
|
10,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity
|
|
|
201,693 |
|
|
|
177,365 |
|
|
|
167,510 |
|
|
|
155,113 |
|
|
|
147,395 |
|
Book value per share
|
|
$ |
6.93 |
|
|
$ |
6.19 |
|
|
$ |
5.76 |
|
|
$ |
5.34 |
|
|
$ |
4.98 |
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAAP ratios (insurance companies only):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss and LAE ratio
|
|
|
62.3 |
% |
|
|
65.2 |
% |
|
|
67.9 |
% |
|
|
70.1 |
% |
|
|
72.1 |
% |
|
Expense ratio
|
|
|
34.5 |
% |
|
|
33.5 |
% |
|
|
33.5 |
% |
|
|
34.3 |
% |
|
|
36.5 |
% |
|
Combined ratio
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
98.7 |
% |
|
|
101.4 |
% |
|
|
104.4 |
% |
|
|
108.6 |
% |
Statutory combined ratio
|
|
|
96.3 |
% |
|
|
97.9 |
% |
|
|
101.2 |
% |
|
|
101.9 |
% |
|
|
109.7 |
% |
|
|
(1) |
Both the loss and loss adjustment expense ratios are calculated
based upon unconsolidated insurance company operations. The
following table sets forth the intercompany fees, which are
eliminated upon consolidation. |
27
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
Unconsolidated GAAP data Ratio Calculation
Table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net earned premiums
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
$ |
151,205 |
|
|
$ |
145,383 |
|
Consolidated net losses and LAE
|
|
$ |
146,293 |
|
|
$ |
151,542 |
|
|
$ |
135,938 |
|
|
$ |
98,472 |
|
|
$ |
98,734 |
|
Intercompany claim fees
|
|
|
12,553 |
|
|
|
11,523 |
|
|
|
9,691 |
|
|
|
7,514 |
|
|
|
6,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unconsolidated net losses and LAE
|
|
$ |
158,846 |
|
|
$ |
163,065 |
|
|
$ |
145,629 |
|
|
$ |
105,986 |
|
|
$ |
104,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAAP net loss and LAE ratio
|
|
|
62.3 |
% |
|
|
65.2 |
% |
|
|
67.9 |
% |
|
|
70.1 |
% |
|
|
72.1 |
% |
Consolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses
|
|
$ |
50,479 |
|
|
$ |
44,439 |
|
|
$ |
33,424 |
|
|
$ |
23,606 |
|
|
$ |
33,573 |
|
Intercompany administrative and other underwriting fees
|
|
|
37,442 |
|
|
|
39,231 |
|
|
|
38,359 |
|
|
|
28,296 |
|
|
|
19,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses
|
|
$ |
87,921 |
|
|
$ |
83,670 |
|
|
$ |
71,783 |
|
|
$ |
51,902 |
|
|
$ |
53,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAAP expense ratio
|
|
|
34.5 |
% |
|
|
33.5 |
% |
|
|
33.5 |
% |
|
|
34.3 |
% |
|
|
36.5 |
% |
GAAP combined ratio
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
98.7 |
% |
|
|
101.4 |
% |
|
|
104.4 |
% |
|
|
108.6 |
% |
Management uses the GAAP combined ratio and its components to
assess and benchmark underwriting performance.
The GAAP combined ratio is the sum of the GAAP loss and loss
adjustment expense ratio and the GAAP expense ratio. The GAAP
loss and loss adjustment expense ratio is the unconsolidated net
loss and loss adjustment expense in relation to net earned
premiums. The GAAP expense ratio is the unconsolidated policy
acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net
earned premiums.
The statutory combined ratio is the sum of the statutory loss
and loss adjustment expense ratio and the statutory expense
ratio. The statutory loss and loss adjustment expense ratio is
the statutory net loss and loss adjustment expense in relation
to net earned premiums. The statutory expense ratio is the
statutory policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses in
relation to net written premiums.
28
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
|
|
Forward-Looking Statements |
This Form 10-K
may provide information including certain statements which
constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. These include statements regarding the intent, belief,
or current expectations of management, including, but not
limited to, those statements that use the words
believes, expects,
anticipates, estimates, or similar
expressions. You are cautioned that any such forward-looking
statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve
a number of risks and uncertainties, and results could differ
materially from those indicated by such forward-looking
statements. Among the important factors that could cause actual
results to differ materially from those indicated by such
forward-looking statements are: the frequency and severity of
claims; uncertainties inherent in reserve estimates;
catastrophic events; a change in the demand for, pricing of,
availability or collectibility of reinsurance; increased rate
pressure on premiums; obtainment of certain rate increases in
current market conditions; investment rate of return; changes in
and adherence to insurance regulation; actions taken by
regulators, rating agencies or lenders; obtainment of certain
processing efficiencies; changing rates of inflation; general
economic conditions and other risks identified in our reports
and registration statements filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. We are not under any obligation to (and
expressly disclaim any such obligation to) update or alter our
forward-looking statements whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise.
Description of Business
We are a publicly traded specialty risk management company, with
an emphasis on alternative market insurance and risk management
solutions for agents, professional and trade associations, and
small to medium-sized insureds. The alternative market includes
a wide range of approaches to financing and managing risk
exposures, such as captives, rent-a-captives, risk retention and
risk purchasing groups, governmental pools and trusts, and
self-insurance plans. The alternative market developed as a
result of the historical volatility in the cost and availability
of traditional commercial insurance coverages, and usually
involves some form of self-insurance or risk-sharing on the part
of the client. We develop and manage alternative risk management
programs for defined client groups and their members. We also
operate as an insurance agency representing unaffiliated
insurance companies in placing insurance coverages for
policyholders. We define our business segments as specialty risk
management operations and agency operations.
In June 2002, we sold 18,500,000 shares of newly issued
common stock at $3.10 per share in a public offering. In
conjunction, the underwriters exercised their over-allotment
option to acquire 2,775,000 of additional shares of our common
stock. After deducting underwriting discounts, commissions, and
expenses, we received net proceeds from the offering of
$60.5 million. We utilized $57.5 million of the
$60.5 million raised in the public offering to pay down our
line of credit by $20.0 million and contributed
$37.5 million to the surplus of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. The remaining proceeds were used for general
corporate purposes.
Since 2003, we have issued $30.9 million and
$25.0 million in junior subordinated debentures and senior
debentures, respectively. We received a total of
$53.3 million in net proceeds from the issuances of these
debentures, of which $26.2 was contributed to the surplus of our
Insurance Company Subsidiaries and the remaining balance was
used for general corporate purposes. These debentures are
callable after five years from the date of issuance. With the
five year period approaching in 2008 for the junior subordinated
debentures issued in 2003, we will be reviewing the capital
strategy associated with refinancing at lower costs through
debentures or equity.
29
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
|
|
|
Specialty Risk Management Operations |
Our specialty risk management operations segment focuses on
specialty or niche insurance business in which we provide
various services and coverages tailored to meet the specific
requirements of defined client groups and their members. These
services include risk management consulting, claims
administration and handling, loss control and prevention, and
reinsurance placement, along with various types of property and
casualty insurance coverage, including workers
compensation, commercial multiple peril, general liability,
commercial auto liability, and inland marine. Insurance coverage
is provided primarily to associations or similar groups of
members and to specified classes of business of our
agent-partners. We recognize revenue related to the services and
coverages from our specialty risk management operations within
seven categories: net earned premiums, management fees, claims
fees, loss control fees, reinsurance placement, investment
income, and net realized gains (losses).
We categorize our programs into three categories: managed,
risk-sharing, and fully insured. With managed programs, we earn
service fee revenue by providing management and other services
to a clients risk-bearing entity, but generally do not
share in the operating results. With risk-sharing programs, we
share the operating results with the client through a
reinsurance agreement with a captive or rent-a-captive. The
captive and rent-a-captive structures are licensed reinsurance
companies, which have a self-sustaining integrated set of
activities and assets, and are in the reinsurance business for
the purpose of providing a return to their investors, who are
the shareholders (primary beneficiaries) of the
captive company. These primary beneficiaries have their own
equity at risk, decision making authority, and the ability to
absorb losses and are accounted for under the provisions of
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS)
No. 113 Accounting and Reporting for Reinsurance
of Short-Duration and Long-Duration Contracts. In
addition to premium revenue and investment income from our net
retained portion of the operating results, we may also be
compensated through the receipt of ceding commissions and other
fees for policy issuance services and acquisition costs, captive
administration, reinsurance placement, loss prevention services,
and claims administrative and handling services. In addition, we
may benefit from the fees our risk management subsidiary earns
for services we perform on behalf of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries. These fees are eliminated upon consolidation.
However, the fees associated with the captives portion of
the program are reimbursed through a ceding commission. For
financial reporting purposes, ceding commissions are treated as
a reduction in underwriting expenses. With fully insured
programs, we provide our insurance products without a
risk-bearing mechanism and derive revenue from net earned
premiums and investment income. Fully insured programs are
generally developed in response to a specific market opportunity
and when we believe there is potential to evolve into a
risk-sharing mechanism.
We earn commission revenue through the operation of our retail
property and casualty insurance agencies, located in Michigan,
California, and Florida. The agency operations produce
commercial, personal lines, life, and accident and health
insurance, for more than fifty unaffiliated insurance carriers.
The agency produces an immaterial amount of business for our
affiliated Insurance Company Subsidiaries.
30
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
In recent years, we have derived our revenue from the following
sources (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earned premiums
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
18,714 |
|
|
|
16,741 |
|
|
|
16,253 |
|
|
Claims fees(1)
|
|
|
8,776 |
|
|
|
7,113 |
|
|
|
13,207 |
|
|
Loss control fees
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2,174 |
|
|
Reinsurance placement
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
Investment income
|
|
|
21,115 |
|
|
|
17,692 |
|
|
|
14,887 |
|
|
Net realized gains
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty risk management
|
|
|
306,545 |
|
|
|
294,510 |
|
|
|
261,773 |
|
|
Agency operations
|
|
|
12,285 |
|
|
|
11,304 |
|
|
|
9,805 |
|
|
Miscellaneous income(2)
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Intersegment revenue
|
|
|
(1,554 |
) |
|
|
(2,162 |
) |
|
|
(1,324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated revenue
|
|
$ |
318,236 |
|
|
$ |
304,017 |
|
|
$ |
270,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
During 2004, we accelerated the recognition of $3.5 million
in deferred claim revenue, as a result of an earlier than
anticipated termination of two limited duration administrative
services and multi-state claims run-off contracts. These
contracts had been terminated by the liquidator for the
companies during the third quarter of 2004. Had the contract not
been terminated, we would have received additional claims fee
revenue for continued claims handling services. |
|
(2) |
The miscellaneous income included in the revenue relates to
interest income within the holding company. |
Critical Accounting Estimates
In certain circumstances, we are required to make estimates and
assumptions that affect amounts reported in our consolidated
financial statements and related footnotes. We evaluate these
estimates and assumptions on an on-going basis based on a
variety of factors. There can be no assurance, however, the
actual results will not be materially different than our
estimates and assumptions, and that reported results of
operation will not be affected by accounting adjustments needed
to reflect changes in these estimates and assumptions. We
believe the following policies are the most sensitive to
estimates and judgments.
|
|
|
Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses |
Significant periods of time can elapse between the occurrence of
a loss, the reporting of the loss to the insurer, and the
insurers payment of that loss. To recognize liabilities
for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses
(LAE), insurers establish reserves as balance sheet
liabilities representing estimates of amounts needed to pay
reported and unreported net losses and LAE.
We establish a liability for losses and LAE, which represent
case base estimates of reported unpaid losses and LAE and
actuarial estimates of incurred but not reported losses
(IBNR) and LAE. Such liabilities, by necessity, are
based upon estimates and, while we believe the amount of our
reserves is adequate, the ultimate liability may be greater or
less than the estimate. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
we have accrued $501.1 million and $458.7 million of
gross loss and LAE reserves, respectively.
31
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
The following table sets forth our gross and net reserves for
losses and LAE based upon an underlying source of data, at
December 31, 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case | |
|
IBNR | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Direct
|
|
$ |
181,884 |
|
|
$ |
227,864 |
|
|
$ |
409,748 |
|
Assumed-Directly Managed(1)
|
|
|
17,777 |
|
|
|
41,264 |
|
|
|
59,041 |
|
Assumed-Residual Markets(2)
|
|
|
9,242 |
|
|
|
16,855 |
|
|
|
26,097 |
|
Assumed-Retroceded
|
|
|
1,281 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
1,508 |
|
Assumed-Other
|
|
|
3,031 |
|
|
|
1,652 |
|
|
|
4,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
213,215 |
|
|
|
287,862 |
|
|
|
501,077 |
|
Less Ceded
|
|
|
90,038 |
|
|
|
108,384 |
|
|
|
198,422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
$ |
123,177 |
|
|
$ |
179,478 |
|
|
$ |
302,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Directly managed represents business managed and processed by
our underwriting, claims, and loss control departments,
utilizing our internal systems and related controls. |
|
(2) |
Residual markets represent mandatory pooled workers
compensation business based upon an individual companys
market share by state. |
In reference to the above table, the reserves related to our
direct business and assumed business which we manage directly,
are established through transactions processed through our
internal systems and related controls. Accordingly, the case
reserves are established on a current basis, therefore there is
no backlog, and IBNR is determined utilizing various actuarial
methods based upon historical data. Ultimate reserve estimates
related to assumed business from residual markets are provided
by individual states on a two quarter lag and include an
estimated reserve based upon actuarial methods for this lag.
Assumed business which is subsequently 100% retroceded to
participating reinsurers relates to business previously
discontinued and now is in run-off. Lastly, in relation to
assumed business from other sources, we receive case and paid
loss data within a forty-five day reporting period and develop
our estimates for IBNR based on both current and historical data.
The completeness and accuracy of data received by cedants on
assumed business that we do not manage directly is verified
through monthly reconciliations to detailed statements,
inception to date rollforwards of claim data, actuarial
estimates of historical trends, field audits, and a series of
management oversight reports on a program basis.
The following table sets forth our net case and IBNR reserves
for losses and LAE by line of business at December 31, 2006
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Case | |
|
Net IBNR | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
60,882 |
|
|
$ |
76,231 |
|
|
$ |
137,113 |
|
Residual Markets
|
|
|
9,242 |
|
|
|
16,856 |
|
|
|
26,098 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril/ General Liability
|
|
|
21,340 |
|
|
|
41,716 |
|
|
|
63,056 |
|
Commercial Automobile
|
|
|
24,555 |
|
|
|
30,087 |
|
|
|
54,642 |
|
Other
|
|
|
7,158 |
|
|
|
14,588 |
|
|
|
21,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
123,177 |
|
|
$ |
179,478 |
|
|
$ |
302,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When a claim is reported to one of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries, for the majority of claims, our claims personnel
within our risk management subsidiary will establish a case
reserve for the estimated amount of the ultimate payment for a
majority of our claims. The amount of the reserve is primarily
based upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of claim
involved, the circumstances surrounding each claim, and
32
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
the policy provisions relating to the type of losses. The
estimate reflects the informed judgment of such personnel based
on general insurance reserving practices, as well as the
experience and knowledge of the claims person. Until the claim
is resolved, these estimates are revised as deemed necessary by
the responsible claims personnel based on subsequent
developments, new information or periodic reviews of the claims.
In addition to case reserves and in accordance with industry
practice, we maintain estimates of reserves for losses and LAE
incurred but not yet reported. We project an estimate of
ultimate losses and LAE at each reporting date. The difference
between the projected ultimate loss and LAE reserves and the
case loss reserves and LAE reserves, is carried as IBNR
reserves. By using both estimates of reported claims and IBNR
determined using generally accepted actuarial reserving
techniques, we estimate the ultimate liability for losses and
LAE, net of reinsurance recoverables.
Our reserves are reviewed by internal and independent actuaries
for adequacy on a quarterly basis. When reviewing reserves, we
analyze historical data and estimate the impact of various
factors such as: (1) per claim information;
(2) industry and our historical loss experience;
(3) legislative enactments, judicial decisions, legal
developments in the imposition of damages, and changes in
political attitudes; and (4) trends in general economic
conditions, including the effects of inflation. This process
assumes that past experience, adjusted for the effects of
current developments and anticipated trends, is an appropriate
basis for predicting future events. There is no precise method,
however, for subsequently evaluating the impact of any specific
factor on the adequacy of reserves, because the eventual
deficiency or redundancy is affected by multiple factors.
The key assumptions we use in our selection of ultimate reserves
include underlying actuarial methodologies, a review of current
pricing and underwriting initiatives, an evaluation of
reinsurance costs and retention levels, and a detailed claims
analysis with an emphasis on how aggressive claims handling may
be impacting the paid and incurred loss data trends embedded in
the traditional actuarial methods. With respect to the ultimate
estimates for losses and LAE, the key assumptions remained
consistent for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Reinsurance recoverables represent (1) amounts currently
due from reinsurers on paid losses and LAE, (2) amounts
recoverable from reinsurers on case basis estimates of reported
losses and LAE, and (3) amounts recoverable from reinsurers
on actuarial estimates of IBNR losses and LAE. Such
recoverables, by necessity, are based upon estimates.
Reinsurance does not legally discharge us from our legal
liability to our insureds, but it does make the assuming
reinsurer liable to us to the extent of the reinsurance ceded.
Instead of being netted against the appropriate liabilities,
ceded unearned premiums and reinsurance recoverables on paid and
unpaid losses and LAE are reported separately as assets in our
consolidated balance sheets. Reinsurance recoverable balances
are also subject to credit risk associated with the particular
reinsurer. In our selection of reinsurers, we continually
evaluate their financial stability. While we believe our
reinsurance recoverables are collectible, the ultimate
recoverable may be greater or less than the amount accrued. At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, reinsurance recoverables on
paid and unpaid losses were $202.7 million and
$202.6 million, respectively.
In our risk-sharing programs, we are subject to credit risk with
respect to the payment of claims by our clients captive,
rent-a-captive, large deductible programs, indemnification
agreements, or on the portion of risk either ceded to the
captives, or retained by the clients. The capitalization and
credit worthiness of prospective risk-sharing partners is one of
the factors we consider upon entering into and renewing
risk-sharing programs. We collateralize balances due from our
risk-sharing partners through funds withheld trusts or stand-by
letters of credit issued by highly rated banks. We have
historically maintained an allowance for the potential
uncollectibility of certain reinsurance balances due from some
risk-sharing partners, some of which are in litigation. At the
end of each quarter, an analysis of these exposures is conducted
to determine the
33
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
potential exposure to uncollectibility. At December 31,
2006, we believe this allowance is adequate. To date, we have
not, in the aggregate, experienced material difficulties in
collecting balances from our risk-sharing partners. No assurance
can be given, however, regarding the future ability of any of
our risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations.
|
|
|
Investments and Other Than Temporary Impairments of
Securities and Unrealized Losses on Investments |
Our investment securities are classified as available for sale.
Investments classified as available for sale are available to be
sold in the future in response to our liquidity needs, changes
in market interest rates, tax strategies and asset-liability
management strategies, among other reasons. Available for sale
securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and
losses reported in the accumulated other comprehensive income
component of shareholders equity, net of deferred taxes
and, accordingly, have no effect on net income. However, if
there is a decline in the fair value of an investment below its
cost and the decline is considered other than temporary, the
amount of decline below cost is charged to earnings.
Our investment portfolio is primarily invested in debt
securities classified as available for sale, with a
concentration in fixed income securities of a high quality. Our
investment philosophy is to maximize after-tax earnings and
maintain significant investments in tax-exempt bonds. Our policy
for the valuation of temporarily impaired securities is to
determine impairment based on analysis of, but not limited to,
the following factors: (1) rating downgrade or other credit
event (e.g., failure to pay interest when due);
(2) financial condition and near-term prospects of the
issuer, including any specific events which may influence the
operations of the issuer such as changes in technology or
discontinuance of a business segment; (3) prospects for the
issuers industry segment; and (4) intent and ability
to retain the investment for a period of time sufficient to
allow for anticipated recovery in market value. We evaluate our
investments in securities to determine other than temporary
impairment, no less than quarterly. Investments that are deemed
other than temporarily impaired are written down to their
estimated net fair value and the related losses recognized in
income. There were no impaired investments written down in 2006,
2005, and 2004. There can be no assurance, however, that
significant changes in the above factors in relation to our
investment portfolio, will not result in future impairment
charges.
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, we had 293 and 267
securities that were in an unrealized loss position,
respectively. These investments all had unrealized losses of
less than ten percent. At December 31, 2006, 128 of those
investments, with an aggregate $127.3 million and
$3.1 million fair value and unrealized loss, respectively,
have been in an unrealized loss position for more than eighteen
months. At December 31, 2005, thirty-nine of those
investments, with an aggregate $29.9 million and
$1.2 million fair value and unrealized loss, respectively,
have been in an unrealized loss position for more than eighteen
months. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, gross unrealized
losses on available for sale securities were $5.1 million
and $5.5 million, respectively.
We recognize premiums written as earned on a pro rata basis over
the life of the policy term. Unearned premiums represent the
portion of premiums written that are applicable to the unexpired
terms of an in force policy. Provisions for unearned premiums on
reinsurance assumed from others are made on the basis of ceding
reports when received and actuarial estimates.
For the year ending December 31, 2006, total assumed
written premiums were $83.9 million, of which
$72.6 million, relates to assumed business we manage
directly, and therefore, no estimation is involved. The
remaining $11.3 million of assumed written premiums
includes $10.1 million related to residual markets.
Assumed premium estimates are specifically related to the
mandatory assumed pool business from the National Council on
Compensation Insurance (NCCI), or residual market
business. The pools cede
34
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
workers compensation business to participating companies
based upon the individual companys market share by state.
The activity is reported from the NCCI to participating
companies on a two quarter lag. To accommodate this lag, we
estimate premium and loss activity based on historical and
market based results. Historically, we have not experienced any
material difficulties or disputes in collecting balances from
NCCI; and therefore, no provision for doubtful accounts is
recorded related to the assumed premium estimate.
In addition, certain premiums are subject to retrospective
premium adjustments. Premium is recognized over the term of the
insurance contract.
Fee income, which includes risk management consulting, loss
control, and claims administration services, is recognized in
the period the services are provided. Claims processing fees are
recognized as revenue over the estimated life of the claims, or
the estimated life of the contract. For those contracts that
provide services beyond the contractually defined termination
date of the related contracts, fees are deferred in an amount
equal to an estimate of our obligation to continue to provide
services.
Commission income, which includes reinsurance placement, is
recorded on the later of the effective date or the billing date
of the policies on which they were earned. Commission income is
reported net of any sub-producer commission expense. Any
commission adjustments that occur subsequent to the earnings
process are recognized upon notification from the insurance
companies. Profit sharing commissions from insurance companies
are recognized when determinable, which is when such commissions
are received.
We review, on an ongoing basis, the collectibility of our
receivables and establish an allowance for estimated
uncollectible accounts. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
the allowance for uncollectibles on receivables was
$2.9 million and $3.9 million, respectively.
We are subject at times to various claims, lawsuits and
proceedings relating principally to alleged errors or omissions
in the placement of insurance, claims administration, consulting
services and other business transactions arising in the ordinary
course of business. Where appropriate, we vigorously defend such
claims, lawsuits and proceedings. Some of these claims, lawsuits
and proceedings seek damages, including consequential, exemplary
or punitive damages, in amounts that could, if awarded, be
significant. Most of the claims, lawsuits and proceedings
arising in the ordinary course of business are covered by errors
and omissions insurance or other appropriate insurance. In terms
of deductibles associated with such insurance, we have
established provisions against these items, which are believed
to be adequate in light of current information and legal advice.
In accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, if it is probable that an asset has
been impaired or a liability has been incurred as of the date of
the financial statements and the amount of loss is estimable, an
accrual is provided for the costs to resolve these claims in our
consolidated financial statements. Period expenses related to
the defense of such claims are included in other operating
expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of income.
We, with the assistance of outside counsel, adjust such
provisions according to new developments or changes in the
strategy in dealing with such matters. On the basis of current
information, we do not expect the outcome of the claims,
lawsuits and proceedings to which we are subject to, either
individually, or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition. However, it is possible that
future results of operations or cash flows for any particular
quarter or annual period could be materially affected by an
unfavorable resolution of any such matters.
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the
fair value of net assets of subsidiaries acquired. As required
by SFAS No. 142 Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, we no longer amortize goodwill and, at least
annually, we test all existing goodwill for impairment using a
fair value approach, on a reporting unit basis. Our annual
assessment date for goodwill impairment testing is
October 1st. We test for
35
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
impairment more frequently if events or changes in circumstances
indicate that there may be an impairment to goodwill. We carry
goodwill on two reporting units within the agency operations
segment in the amount of $6.5 million and three reporting
units within the specialty risk management operations segment in
the amount of $25.0 million. Based on our most recent
evaluation of goodwill impairment, we determined that no
impairment to goodwill exists.
Results of Operations
Overall underwriting results in 2006 continued to show
improvement in comparison to 2005. Our results for 2006
demonstrate our commitment to strong underwriting discipline, as
well as improved profitability within our specialty insurance
and fee-for-service programs. Net income for 2006 in comparison
to 2005 is indicative of our selective growth consistent with
our corporate underwriting guidelines and controls over price
adequacy. We continued to achieve operational efficiencies and
enhancements in 2006. As a result, our generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP) combined ratio improved
1.9 percentage points to 96.8% in 2006 from 98.7% in 2005.
In May 2006, we announced the affirmation of A.M. Best
Companys financial strength rating of B++ (Very Good) for
three of our insurance company subsidiaries: Star Insurance
Company (Star), Savers Property & Casualty
Insurance Company, and Williamsburg National Insurance Company.
Concurrently, A.M. Best upgraded the rating of our other
insurance company subsidiary, Ameritrust Insurance Corporation,
to B++ (Very Good), from B+ (Very Good). Additionally, A.M. Best
upgraded the outlook for all the ratings from stable to
positive. A positive outlook is placed on a companys
rating if its financial and market trends are favorable,
relative to its current rating level.
Gross written premium was down slightly in comparison to 2005.
This slight decrease was primarily the result of exiting a
limited number of small programs that no longer met our pricing
standards, therefore reducing premium volume in certain limited
programs in which pricing competition dictates that we write
less volume and maintaining pricing discipline throughout the
organization. In addition, this decrease was the result of a
reduction in audit related premiums. We continue to follow
pricing guidelines mandated by our corporate underwriting
guidelines. Overall, our
year-to-date rate
change was relatively flat. In 2006, there were anticipated
mandatory rate decreases in workers compensation in some
states, but for the most part those were offset by benefit
changes that should lower incurred losses. We anticipate rates
to remain relatively stable in 2007. We implemented several new
programs in 2006 and continue to be selective on new program
implementation by focusing on those that meet our underwriting
guidelines and have a history of profitability. Our statutory
surplus increased by $24.0 million in 2006 to
$165.1 million, from $141.1 million in 2005. In
addition, we had positive cash flow from operations of
$74.3 million in 2006, compared to $81.9 million in
2005.
2006 compared to 2005:
Net income improved $4.1 million, or 23.0%, to
$22.0 million, or $0.75 per diluted share, in 2006,
from net income of $17.9 million, or $0.60 per diluted
share, in 2005. As previously indicated, this improvement is
primarily the result of our selective growth consistent with our
corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price
adequacy. In addition, during 2005 we increased our retention
levels on certain reinsurance treaties, which favorably impacted
net earned premiums and net income for 2006, compared to 2005.
Growth in our fee-for-service programs also contributed to the
overall improvement in net income in comparison to 2005.
Revenues increased $14.2 million, or 4.7%, to
$318.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006,
from $304.0 million for the comparable period in 2005. This
increase reflects a $4.9 million, or 2.0%, increase in net
36
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
earned premiums. The increase in net earned premiums is the
result of our selective growth consistent with our corporate
underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy, as
well as the favorable impact from an increase in our retention
levels on certain reinsurance treaties effective in 2005.
Offsetting the overall increase in net earned premiums for the
year ended December 31, 2006, was a reduction in audit
related premiums in comparison to 2005. The increase in revenue
was also the result of an overall increase in fee-for-service
revenue, primarily as a result of new managed programs. In
addition, the increase in revenue reflects a $4.1 million
increase in investment income, primarily due to an increase in
average invested assets as a result of improved cashflow from
favorable underwriting results, an increase in the duration of
our reserves, and proceeds from the junior subordinated
debentures issued in the third quarter of 2005. The increase in
investment income is also the result of a slight increase in
yield.
2005 compared to 2004:
Net income improved $3.8 million, or 27.4%, to
$17.9 million, or $0.60 per diluted share, in 2005,
from net income of $14.1 million, or $0.48 per diluted
share, in 2004. This improvement was primarily the result of our
controlled growth of premiums written, the impact from rate
increases in 2004 and 2005, overall expense initiatives, and the
continued leveraging of fixed costs. In addition, we increased
our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties, which
favorably impacted net earned premiums and net income. These
improvements manifested, despite the favorable effect in the
third quarter of 2004, from the acceleration of
$3.5 million in deferred revenue, less approximately
$500,000 in expenses and $1.0 million in taxes, relating to
the early termination of a specific multi-state claims run-off
contract. Net income was also favorably impacted by
approximately $814,000 from profit-sharing commissions received
in 2005, partially offset by continuing expenses primarily
related to implementation and compliance with Section 404
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In addition, net income was favorably
impacted as a result of a $386,000 increase in the deferred tax
asset relating to the increase in the statutory federal tax rate
from 34% to 35%.
Revenues increased $33.7 million, or 12.5%, to
$304.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005,
from $270.3 million for the comparable period in 2004. This
increase reflected a $35.5 million, or 16.5%, increase in
net earned premiums. The increase in net earned premiums was the
result of our controlled growth in written premiums from various
existing programs and new programs implemented in 2004, a higher
retention on certain reinsurance treaties effective in 2005, and
the impact of an overall 8.4% rate increase in 2004. Partially
offsetting these increases in revenue was an approximate
$5.5 million decrease in managed fee revenue, which was
primarily the result of an acceleration of $3.5 million in
deferred claim fee revenue recognized in the third quarter of
2004. This comparative decrease in managed fee revenue in 2005
was due to the acceleration of deferred claim fee revenue in
2004, as the result of an earlier than anticipated termination
of two limited duration administrative services and multi-state
claims run-off contracts. These contracts had been terminated by
the liquidator for the companies during the third quarter of
2004. Therefore, the revenues that we anticipated earning in the
first nine months of 2005 were accelerated into the third
quarter of 2004. In addition, the increase in revenue reflected
a $3.1 million increase in investment income, primarily the
result of an increase in average invested assets and a slight
increase in yield.
37
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
|
|
|
Specialty Risk Management Operations |
The following table sets forth the revenues and results from
operations for our specialty risk management operations (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earned premiums
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
18,714 |
|
|
|
16,741 |
|
|
|
16,253 |
|
|
Claims fees(1)
|
|
|
8,776 |
|
|
|
7,113 |
|
|
|
13,207 |
|
|
Loss control fees
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2,174 |
|
|
Reinsurance placement
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
Investment income
|
|
|
21,115 |
|
|
|
17,692 |
|
|
|
14,887 |
|
|
Net realized gains
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
$ |
306,545 |
|
|
$ |
294,510 |
|
|
$ |
261,773 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty risk management operations
|
|
$ |
37,950 |
|
|
$ |
29,444 |
|
|
$ |
23,205 |
|
|
|
(1) |
During 2004, we accelerated the recognition of $3.5 million
in deferred claim revenue, as a result of an earlier than
anticipated termination of two limited duration administrative
services and multi-state claims run-off contracts. These
contracts had been terminated by the liquidator for the
companies during the third quarter of 2004. Had the contract not
been terminated, we would have received additional claims fee
revenue for continued claims handling services. |
2006 compared to 2005:
Revenues from specialty risk management operations increased
$12.0 million, or 4.1%, to $306.5 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006, from $294.5 million for the
comparable period in 2005.
Net earned premiums increased $4.9 million, or 2.0%, to
$254.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2006,
from $250.0 million in the comparable period in 2005. This
increase is primarily the result of selective growth consistent
with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over
price adequacy, as well as the favorable impact from an increase
in our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties.
Offsetting these increases was an overall decrease in audit
related premiums in comparison to 2005, reflecting improvements
in the estimation of exposures during the underwriting cycle.
Management fees increased $2.0 million, or 11.8%, to
$18.7 million, for the year ended December 31, 2006,
from $16.7 million for the comparable period in 2005. This
increase is primarily the result of a Florida-based program
implemented in the second quarter of 2005. In addition, this
increase is the result of growth in a specific New England-based
program. Also contributing to the overall increase in management
fees was the recognition of $250,000 from a profit-based revenue
sharing payment related to a specific managed program.
Claim fees increased $1.7 million, or 23.4%, to
$8.8 million, from $7.1 million for the comparable
period in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of our
2006 entry into the self-insured workers compensation
market in Nevada. In addition, this increase is the result of
increases in revenue related to a specific Minnesota-based
program, as well as a Florida-based program, which was
implemented in the second quarter of 2005.
Net investment income increased $4.1 million, or 22.8%, to
$22.1 million in 2006, from $18.0 million in 2005.
Average invested assets increased $69.6 million, or 16.4%,
to $493.9 million in 2006, from $424.3 million in
2005. The increase in average invested assets reflects cash
flows from underwriting activities primarily
38
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
from favorable underwriting results and an increase in the
duration of our reserves. The increase in the duration of our
reserves reflects the impact of our public entity excess
program, which was implemented at the end of 2003. This program
has a longer duration than the average reserves on our remaining
programs and is a larger proportion of reserves. In addition,
the $19.4 million in net proceeds received from capital
raised in 2005 through the issuances of debentures increased
average invested assets. The average investment yield for 2006
was 4.47%, compared to 4.24% in 2005. The current pre-tax book
yield was 4.35%. The current after-tax book yield was 3.28%,
compared to 3.06% in 2005. This increase is primarily the result
of the shift in our investment portfolio to tax-exempt
investments. The duration of the investment portfolio is
3.9 years.
Specialty risk management operations generated pre-tax income of
$38.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006,
compared to pre-tax income of $29.4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2005. This increase in pre-tax income
demonstrates a continued improvement in underwriting results as
a result of our controlled growth in premium volume and our
continued focus on leveraging of fixed costs. The GAAP combined
ratio was 96.8% for the year ended December 31, 2006,
compared to 98.7% for the comparable period in 2005.
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE)
decreased $5.2 million, or 3.5%, to $146.3 million for
the year ended December 31, 2006, from $151.5 million
for the same period in 2005. Our loss and LAE ratio improved
2.9 percentage points to 62.3% for the year ended
December 31, 2006, from 65.2% for the same period in 2005.
This ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and LAE in relation to
net earned premiums. The accident year loss ratio remained flat
at 63.4% for 2006, compared to 63.3% in 2005. The favorable
development in our loss ratio was primarily the result of
improvement in frequency and claim settlements within the
professional liability line of business. In addition,
workers compensation residual market experience improved
as a result of lower market share assessments and lower loss
reserves on the industry pooled experience. Both 2006 and 2005,
were adversely impacted by a single large workers
compensation claim. The increase was $1.5 million and
$900,000 in 2006 and 2005, respectively. Excluding the adverse
impact of this claim, overall workers compensation
reflected improvement in claim settlements relative to their
collective case reserves. The experience within the general
liability line of business also improved due to favorable case
reserve settlements in 2006, in comparison to 2005. These
improvements were partially offset by a single property claim of
$1.9 million within a California-based agricultural
program. Allowances within other reserve categories,
collectively, did not contribute to the development in 2006,
compared to 2005 where we experienced approximately
$1.3 million in adverse development related to allowances
on reinsurance recoverables. Additional discussion of our
reserve activity is described below within the Other
Items Reserves section.
Our expense ratio for the year ended December 31, 2006 was
34.5%, compared to 33.5% in 2005. This ratio is the
unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting
expenses in relation to net earned premiums. The increase in our
expense ratio in comparison to 2005 reflects a reduction in an
accrual for estimated profit-based ceding commissions on an
excess reinsurance treaty for a specific commercial
transportation program. This decrease was the result of
unfavorable loss development on a limited number of excess of
loss claims from prior accident years and added
$1.6 million to our expenses, or 0.6 percentage points
to our expense ratio for the year, as compared to a favorable
impact on the 2005 expense ratio of $1.1 million, or
0.5 percentage points. As of December 31, 2006, the
remaining accrual was less than $150,000; therefore, we do not
anticipate any further unfavorable adjustments. Offsetting this
increase in the expense ratio was a reduction in insurance
related assessments primarily related to the guaranty fund in
Florida and Nevada.
2005 compared to 2004:
Revenues from specialty risk management operations increased
$32.7 million, or 12.5%, to $294.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005, from $261.8 million for
the comparable period in 2004.
39
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Net earned premiums increased $35.5 million, or 16.5%, to
$250.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005,
from $214.5 million in the comparable period in 2004. This
increase primarily reflected our controlled growth of premiums
written, as well as a favorable impact from an increase in our
retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties.
Management fees increased $488,000, or 3.0%, to
$16.8 million, for the year ended December 31, 2005,
from $16.3 million for the comparable period in 2004.
Management fees were impacted by an anticipated shift in
fee-for-service revenue previously generated from a third party
contract to internally generated fee revenue from a specific
renewal rights agreement that is eliminated upon consolidation.
Due to the earlier than anticipated termination of this third
party contract, the revenues we anticipated earning in 2005 were
accelerated into the third quarter of 2004. Excluding revenue
generated from this third party contract, management fee revenue
increased approximately $1.7 million, or 11.1%, in
comparison to 2004. This increase was primarily the result of a
new Florida-based program implemented in the second quarter of
2005, as well as growth in a specific existing New England-based
program.
Claim fees decreased $6.1 million, or 46.1%, to
$7.1 million, from $13.2 million for the comparable
period in 2004. This decrease reflected a similar anticipated
shifting of revenue previously generated from a multi-state
claims run-off service contract, to internally generated fee
revenue from a specific renewal rights agreement that is
eliminated upon consolidation. Also impacting this comparison
was the effect of the earlier than anticipated termination of
the third party contract, which caused the revenues we
anticipated earning in 2005 to be accelerated into the third
quarter of 2004. Excluding revenue generated from this third
party contract, claim fee revenue would have remained relatively
consistent in comparison to 2004.
Net investment income increased $3.1 million, or 20.5%, to
$18.0 million in 2005, from $14.9 million in 2004.
Average invested assets increased $65.6 million, or 18.3%,
to $424.3 million in 2005, from $358.7 million in
2004. The increase in average invested assets reflected cash
flows from underwriting activities and growth in gross written
premiums during 2004 and 2005, as well as net proceeds from
capital raised in 2004 and 2005 through the issuances of
debentures. The average investment yield for 2005 was 4.24%,
compared to 4.16% in 2004. The current pre-tax book yield was
4.17%. The current after-tax book yield was 3.06%, compared to
2.85% in 2004.
Specialty risk management operations generated pre-tax income of
$29.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005,
compared to pre-tax income of $23.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004. This increase in pre-tax income
demonstrated a continued improvement in underwriting results as
a result of our controlled growth in premium volume and our
continued focus on leveraging of fixed costs. Offsetting a
portion of this improvement, was a $3.0 million pre-tax
benefit, recognized in the third quarter of 2004, from the
previously mentioned acceleration of revenue recognition, net of
expenses, relating to the termination of a specific multi-state
claims run-off contract. The GAAP combined ratio was 98.7% for
the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to 101.4% for
the comparable period in 2004.
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses increased
$15.6 million, or 11.5%, to $151.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005, from $135.9 million for
the same period in 2004. Our loss and LAE ratio improved
2.7 percentage points to 65.2% for the year ended
December 31, 2005, from 67.9% for the same period in 2004.
This ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and LAE in relation to
net earned premiums. The accident year loss ratio improved
2.5 percentage points to 63.3% for the year ended
December 31, 2005, from 65.8% for the same period in 2004.
This overall improvement in the loss ratio reflects the impact
of earned premiums from the controlled growth of profitable
programs which had favorable underwriting experience, as well as
our intended shift in our mix of business between workers
compensation and general liability. Historically, the general
liability line of business has a lower loss ratio and a higher
external producer commission. In addition, the loss ratio was
favorably impacted as a result of efficiencies realized in our
claims handling activities. These improvements were partially
offset by a single large workers compensation claim of
$900,000, as well as an increase to an exposure allowance of
$1.5 million, specific to reinsurance recoverables for a
discontinued
40
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
surety program and a discontinued workers compensation
program. Although we increased our allowance for these specific
exposures, the actual exposures did not increase.
Our expense ratio for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2004 was 33.5%. This ratio is the unconsolidated policy
acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net
earned premiums. Our expense ratio was impacted by an
anticipated increase in gross external commissions, due to the
shift in our mix of business between workers compensation
and general liability. The general liability line of business
has a higher external producer commission rate and, as
previously indicated, a lower loss ratio. Offsetting these
increases to the expense ratio was the impact of the leveraging
of fixed costs.
The following table sets forth the revenues and results from
operations from our agency operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net commission
|
|
$ |
12,285 |
|
|
$ |
11,304 |
|
|
$ |
9,805 |
|
Pre-tax income(1)
|
|
$ |
2,951 |
|
|
$ |
3,343 |
|
|
$ |
2,257 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Our agency operations include an allocation of corporate
overhead, which includes expenses associated with accounting,
information services, legal, and other corporate services. The
corporate overhead allocation excludes those expenses specific
to the holding company. For the years ended December 31,
2006, 2005, and 2004, the allocation of corporate overhead to
the agency operations segment was $2.9 million,
$3.1 million, and $3.5 million, respectively. |
2006 compared to 2005:
Revenue from agency operations, which consists primarily of
agency commission revenue, increased $1.0 million, or 8.7%,
to $12.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2006,
from $11.3 million for the comparable period in 2005. This
increase is primarily the result of the November 2005
acquisition of a Florida-based retail agency and an increase in
profit sharing commissions in comparison to 2005. Offsetting
these increases was a decrease in commission revenue as a result
of a reduction in premium on client renewals.
Agency operations generated pre-tax income, after the allocation
of corporate overhead, of $3.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006, compared to $3.3 million for the
comparable period in 2005. This decrease in pre-tax income in
comparison to 2005 is primarily the result of a slight increase
in operating expenses coupled with the decrease in commission
revenue noted above as a result of the reduction in premium on
client renewals, offset by the favorable impact from the
Florida-based retail agency acquisition.
2005 compared to 2004:
Revenue from agency operations, which consists primarily of
agency commission revenue, increased $1.5 million, or
15.3%, to $11.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005, from $9.8 million for the
comparable period in 2004. This increase was primarily the
result of profit sharing commissions received in the first and
third quarter of 2005. In addition, the agency operations
experienced an increase in new business and renewal retentions
in comparison to 2004, which was partially offset by a reduction
in renewal rates.
Agency operations generated pre-tax income, after the allocation
of corporate overhead, of $3.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005, compared to $2.3 million for the
comparable period in 2004. The improvement in the pre-tax margin
was primarily attributable to the overall increase in
commissions and leveraging of fixed costs. Excluding fixed costs
and the allocation of corporate overhead, all other expenses
remained relatively consistent.
41
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
At December 31, 2006, our best estimate for the ultimate
liability for loss and LAE reserves, net of reinsurance
recoverables, was $302.7 million. We established a
reasonable range of reserves of approximately
$280.3 million to $318.1 million. This range was
established primarily by considering the various indications
derived from standard actuarial techniques and other appropriate
reserve considerations. The following table sets forth this
range by line of business (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Reserve | |
|
Maximum Reserve | |
|
|
Line of Business |
|
Range | |
|
Range | |
|
Selected Reserves | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation(1)
|
|
$ |
154,145 |
|
|
$ |
170,385 |
|
|
$ |
163,211 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril/ General Liability
|
|
|
57,250 |
|
|
|
68,729 |
|
|
|
63,056 |
|
Commercial Automobile
|
|
|
49,718 |
|
|
|
56,049 |
|
|
|
54,642 |
|
Other
|
|
|
19,174 |
|
|
|
22,940 |
|
|
|
21,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Reserves
|
|
$ |
280,287 |
|
|
$ |
318,103 |
|
|
$ |
302,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Includes Residual Markets |
Reserves are reviewed by internal and independent actuaries for
adequacy on a quarterly basis. When reviewing reserves, we
analyze historical data and estimate the impact of numerous
factors such as (1) per claim information;
(2) industry and our historical loss experience;
(3) legislative enactments, judicial decisions, legal
developments in the imposition of damages, and changes in
political attitudes; and (4) trends in general economic
conditions, including the effects of inflation. This process
assumes that past experience, adjusted for the effects of
current developments and anticipated trends, is an appropriate
basis for predicting future events. There is no precise method
for subsequently evaluating the impact of any specific factor on
the adequacy of reserves, because the eventual deficiency or
redundancy is affected by multiple factors.
The key assumptions used in our selection of ultimate reserves
included the underlying actuarial methodologies, a review of
current pricing and underwriting initiatives, an evaluation of
reinsurance costs and retention levels, and a detailed claims
analysis with an emphasis on how aggressive claims handling may
be impacting the paid and incurred loss data trends embedded in
the traditional actuarial methods. With respect to the ultimate
estimates for losses and LAE, the key assumptions remained
consistent for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and
2004.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, we reported a
decrease in net ultimate loss estimates for accident years 2005
and prior of $2.7 million, or 1.0% of $271.4 million
of net loss and LAE reserves at December 31, 2005. The
decrease in net ultimate loss estimates reflected revisions in
the estimated reserves as a result of actual claims activity in
calendar year 2006 that differed from the projected activity.
There were no significant
42
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
changes in the key assumptions utilized in the analysis and
calculations of our reserves during 2006 and 2005. The major
components of this change in ultimate loss estimates are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incurred Losses | |
|
Paid Losses | |
|
|
|
|
Reserves at | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Reserves at | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
Current | |
|
Prior | |
|
Total | |
|
Current | |
|
Prior | |
|
|
|
December 31, | |
Line of Business |
|
2005 | |
|
Year | |
|
Years | |
|
Incurred | |
|
Year | |
|
Years | |
|
Total Paid | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
128,802 |
|
|
$ |
58,687 |
|
|
$ |
(920 |
) |
|
$ |
57,767 |
|
|
$ |
8,850 |
|
|
$ |
40,606 |
|
|
$ |
49,456 |
|
|
$ |
137,113 |
|
Residual Markets
|
|
|
24,440 |
|
|
|
10,920 |
|
|
|
(848 |
) |
|
|
10,072 |
|
|
|
4,248 |
|
|
|
4,166 |
|
|
|
8,414 |
|
|
|
26,098 |
|
Commercial Multiple Peril/ General Liability
|
|
|
52,506 |
|
|
|
24,985 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
25,269 |
|
|
|
2,545 |
|
|
|
12,174 |
|
|
|
14,719 |
|
|
|
63,056 |
|
Commercial Automobile
|
|
|
44,382 |
|
|
|
37,305 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
37,901 |
|
|
|
9,202 |
|
|
|
18,439 |
|
|
|
27,641 |
|
|
|
54,642 |
|
Other
|
|
|
21,293 |
|
|
|
17,115 |
|
|
|
(1,831 |
) |
|
|
15,284 |
|
|
|
6,945 |
|
|
|
7,886 |
|
|
|
14,831 |
|
|
|
21,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Reserves
|
|
|
271,423 |
|
|
$ |
149,012 |
|
|
$ |
(2,719 |
) |
|
$ |
146,293 |
|
|
$ |
31,790 |
|
|
$ |
83,271 |
|
|
$ |
115,061 |
|
|
|
302,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance Recoverable
|
|
|
187,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198,422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re-Estimated | |
|
Development | |
|
|
|
|
Reserves at | |
|
as a | |
|
|
Reserves at | |
|
December 31, | |
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
2006 on | |
|
Prior Year | |
Line of Business |
|
2005 | |
|
Prior Years | |
|
Reserves | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Workers Compensation
|
|
$ |
128,802 |
|
|
$ |
127,882 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
Commercial Multiple Peril/ General Liability
|
|
|
52,506 |
|
|
|
52,790 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Commercial Automobile
|
|
|
44,382 |
|
|
|
44,978 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
21,293 |
|
|
|
19,462 |
|
|
|
(8.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-total
|
|
|
246,983 |
|
|
|
245,112 |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
)% |
Residual Markets
|
|
|
24,440 |
|
|
|
23,592 |
|
|
|
(3.5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Reserves
|
|
$ |
271,423 |
|
|
$ |
268,704 |
|
|
|
(1.0 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workers Compensation Excluding Residual Markets |
The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the workers
compensation line of business, excluding residual markets,
decreased $920,000, or 0.7% of net workers compensation
reserves. This net overall decrease reflects decreases of
$837,000, $1.7 million, and $592,000 in the ultimate loss
estimates for accident years 2005, 2004, and 2001, respectively.
These decreases reflect better than expected experience for many
of our workers compensation programs, including a Nevada
program, a Florida program, a Tennessee program, and an Alabama
program. Average severity on reported claims did not increase as
much as anticipated in the prior actuarial projections so
ultimate loss estimates were reduced. These decreases were
offset by increases of $1.6 million, $631,000, and $766,000
in the ultimate loss estimate for accident years 2003, 2000, and
1998, respectively. These increases reflect some large claim
activity and case reserve strengthening primarily related to a
Massachusetts program and a large claim in a Florida program.
The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident
years was insignificant.
|
|
|
Commercial Multiple Peril/ General Liability |
The commercial multiple peril line and general liability line of
business had an increase in net ultimate loss estimates of
$284,000, or 0.5% of net commercial multiple peril and general
liability reserves. The net increase reflects increases of
$239,000, $439,000, and $260,000 in the ultimate loss estimates
for accident years 2002, 2000, and 1995, respectively. These
increases reflect greater than expected claim activity within a
43
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
California program and a Missouri program. These increases also
reflect a large settlement in an inactive national program.
These increases were offset by decreases of $907,000 and
$350,000 in accident years 2005 and 2003, respectively. These
decreases reflect better than expected claim emergence in a
California program and the aforementioned Missouri program. The
change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years
was insignificant.
The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the commercial
automobile line of business increased $596,000, or 1.3% of net
commercial automobile reserves. This net overall increase
reflects increases of $1.5 million and $596,000 in accident
years 2005 and 2003, respectively. These increases reflect
higher than expected emergence of claim activity in two
California-based programs. These increases were offset by
decreases of $1.6 million and $352,000 in accident years
2004 and 2001, respectively. These decreases reflect better than
expected claim emergence within a California-based program. The
change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years
was insignificant.
The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the other lines of
business decreased $1.8 million, or 8.6% of net reserves.
This net decrease reflects a reduction of $1.7 million in
accident year 2004. This decrease is due to better than expected
case reserve development in a medical malpractice program,
offset by an increase of $254,000 in accident year 2005. This
increase in accident year 2005 is the result of a claim within a
specific California-based program. The change in ultimate loss
estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.
The workers compensation residual market line of business
had a decrease in net ultimate loss estimates of $848,000, or
3.5% of net reserves. This decrease reflects reductions of
$1.2 million, $618,000, and $294,000 in accident years
2004, 2003, and 2002, respectively. Offsetting these decreases
was an increase of $1.2 million in accident year 2005. We
record loss reserves as reported by the National Council on
Compensation Insurance (NCCI), plus a provision for
the reserves incurred but not yet analyzed and reported to us
due to a two quarter lag in reporting. These changes reflect a
difference between our estimate of the lag incurred but not
reported and the amounts reported by the NCCI in the quarter.
The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident
years was insignificant.
Salary and Employee Benefits
Salary and employee benefits increased $3.3 million, or
6.3%, to $54.6 million in 2006, from $51.3 million for
the comparable period in 2005. This increase primarily reflects
an increase in variable compensation. In addition, this increase
is the result of an increase in staffing levels, primarily as a
result of the recent additions of our Florida-based retail
agency and our entry into the self-insured workers
compensation market in Nevada. Excluding those additions,
overall staffing levels for 2006 were slightly higher in
comparison to 2005.
Salary and employee benefits decreased $966,000, or 1.8%, to
$51.3 million in 2005, from $52.3 million for the
comparable period in 2004. This decrease primarily reflected a
decrease in variable compensation, as a result of raising the
performance targets for achievement. This decrease was partially
offset by merit increases for associates. In addition, this
decrease was partially due to a slight reduction in staffing
levels in comparison to 2004 as a result of our expense control
initiatives.
Additional discussion of our variable compensation plan is
described below under Variable Compensation.
44
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Other Administrative Expenses
Other administrative expenses increased $2.2 million, or
8.2%, to $29.4 million in 2006, from $27.2 million in
2005. A portion of this increase is the result of the expenses
associated with the additions of our Florida-based agency and
our entry into the self-insured workers compensation
market in Nevada. As revenues increase in these two locations we
expect to see margins improve. In addition, the increase in
other administrative expenses is the result of information
technology enhancements and various increases in other general
operating expenses in comparison to 2005.
Other administrative expenses increased $1.2 million, or
4.7%, to $27.2 million in 2005, from $26.0 million in
2004. This increase was primarily attributable to consulting and
audit expenses associated with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as increases in expenses as the
result of information technology enhancements. Offsetting these
increases was a decrease in bad debt expense as a result of
overall refinements in our estimation for allowances on bad
debt. The increase in other administrative expenses was also
offset by our overall expense control initiatives.
Salary and employee benefits and other administrative expenses
include both corporate overhead and the holding company expenses
included in the non-allocated expenses of our segment
information.
Interest Expense
Interest expense for 2006, 2005, and 2004 was $6.0 million,
$3.9 million, and $2.3 million, respectively. Interest
expense is primarily attributable to our debentures and current
lines of credit, which are described within the Liquidity and
Capital Resources section of Managements Discussion
and Analysis. The increase in interest expense was related to
the issuance of the senior debentures issued in the second
quarter of 2004 and the junior subordinated debentures issued in
the third quarter of 2005, as well as an overall increase in the
average interest rates. The average outstanding balance on our
lines of credit was $10.6 million, $9.0 million, and
$14.8 million in 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. The
average interest rate, excluding our debentures, was
approximately 6.5%, 4.8%, and 5.2%, in 2006, 2005, and 2004,
respectively, primarily as a result of increases in the
underlying eurocurrency based rate.
Income Taxes
Income tax expense, which includes both federal and state taxes,
for 2006, 2005 and 2004, was $9.6 million,
$7.8 million, and $6.4 million, or 30.5%, 30.2% and
31.2% of income before taxes, respectively. Our effective tax
rate differs from the 35% statutory rate primarily due to a
shift towards increasing investments in tax-exempt securities in
an effort to maximize after-tax investment yields. Our current
and deferred taxes are calculated using a 35% statutory rate.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our principal sources of funds, which include both regulated and
non-regulated cash flows, are insurance premiums, investment
income, proceeds from the maturity and sale of invested assets,
risk management fees, and agency commissions. Funds are
primarily used for the payment of claims, commissions, salaries
and employee benefits, other operating expenses,
shareholders dividends, share repurchases, and debt
service. Our regulated sources of funds are insurance premiums,
investment income, and proceeds from the maturity and sale of
invested assets. These regulated funds are used for the payment
of claims, policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses,
and taxes relating to the regulated portion of net income. Our
non-regulated sources of funds are in the form of commission
revenue, outside management fees, and intercompany management
fees. Our capital resources include both non-regulated cash flow
and excess capital in our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, which
is defined as the dividend Star may issue without prior approval
from our regulators. We review the excess capital in aggregate
to determine the use of such capital. The general uses are as
follows,
45
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
contributions to our Insurance Company Subsidiaries to support
premium growth, make select acquisitions, service debt, pay
shareholders dividends, repurchase shares, investments in
technology, or other expenses of the holding company. The
following table illustrates net income, excluding interest,
depreciation, and amortization, between our regulated and
non-regulated subsidiaries, which reconciles to our consolidated
statement of income and statement of cash flows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regulated Subsidiaries:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
19,712 |
|
|
$ |
13,508 |
|
|
$ |
6,973 |
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities
|
|
|
3,033 |
|
|
|
3,003 |
|
|
|
6,866 |
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
46,915 |
|
|
|
59,784 |
|
|
|
48,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
49,948 |
|
|
|
62,787 |
|
|
|
55,136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$ |
69,660 |
|
|
$ |
76,295 |
|
|
$ |
62,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-regulated Subsidiaries:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
2,322 |
|
|
$ |
4,402 |
|
|
$ |
7,088 |
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
2,553 |
|
|
|
2,452 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
5,976 |
|
|
|
3,856 |
|
|
|
2,535 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, excluding interest, depreciation, and amortization
|
|
|
11,441 |
|
|
|
10,908 |
|
|
|
11,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities
|
|
|
3,161 |
|
|
|
4,444 |
|
|
|
(1,063 |
) |
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
(852 |
) |
|
|
(3,194 |
) |
|
|
2,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
2,309 |
|
|
|
1,250 |
|
|
|
1,477 |
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
(2,553 |
) |
|
|
(2,452 |
) |
|
|
(1,591 |
) |
|
Amortization
|
|
|
(590 |
) |
|
|
(198 |
) |
|
|
(376 |
) |
|
Interest
|
|
|
(5,976 |
) |
|
|
(3,856 |
) |
|
|
(2,535 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$ |
4,631 |
|
|
$ |
5,652 |
|
|
$ |
8,565 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated total adjustments
|
|
|
52,257 |
|
|
|
64,037 |
|
|
|
56,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$ |
74,291 |
|
|
$ |
81,947 |
|
|
$ |
70,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flow provided by operations was $74.3 million in 2006,
compared to $81.9 million in 2005. Cash flow provided by
operations in 2004 was $70.7 million.
2006 compared to 2005:
Regulated subsidiaries cash flow provided by operations
for the year ended December 31, 2006, was
$69.7 million, compared to $76.3 million for the
comparable period in 2005. This decrease was primarily the
result of timing in relation to reinsurance payments. This
decrease was slightly offset as a result of improved
underwriting results, lower paid losses in proportion to
incurred losses, and an increase in investment income.
46
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Non-regulated subsidiaries cash flow provided by
operations for the year ended December 31, 2006, was
$4.6 million, compared to $5.7 million for the
comparable period in 2005. This decrease in cash flow in
comparison to 2005 was primarily the result of a decrease in net
income. The decrease in net income was primarily attributable to
an increase in interest expense related to the issuance of the
junior subordinated debentures issued in the third quarter of
2005 and an overall increase in the average interest rates. In
addition, the decrease in net income was the result of an
increase in administrative costs related to the additions of our
Florida-based agency and our entry into the self-insured
workers compensation market in Nevada, as well as an
increase due to information technology enhancements. These
increases were offset by an overall increase in fee-for-service
and agency commission revenue.
We continue to anticipate a temporary increase in cash outflows
related to our investments in technology as we enhance our
operating systems and controls. We believe these temporary
increases will not affect our liquidity, debt covenants, or
other key financial measures.
2005 compared to 2004:
Regulated subsidiaries cash flow provided by operations
for the year ended December 31, 2005, was
$76.3 million, compared to $62.1 million for the
comparable period in 2004. This increase was the result of
improved underwriting results and an increase in investment
income, offset by a tax benefit reduction from the utilization
of the net operating loss carryforward in 2004.
Non-regulated subsidiaries cash flow provided by
operations for the year ended December 31, 2005, was
$5.7 million, compared to $8.6 million for the
comparable period in 2004. The decrease in non-regulated cash
flow from operations reflected the decrease in net income, which
was primarily the result of the previously mentioned
acceleration of revenue, recognized in the third quarter of
2004. In addition, the decrease in net income was the result of
an increase in administrative costs related to compliance with
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, offset by an
increase in revenue associated with profit-sharing commissions.
In addition, the decrease in cash flow from operations was the
result of variable compensation payments made in the first
quarter of 2005, related to 2004 performance and profitability
and a decrease in cash as a result of tax payments.
In addition to the changes described above in relation to our
cash provided by operations, we had an increase in cash used in
investing activities as a result of an $11.6 million cash
payment for our new corporate headquarters in the first quarter
of 2005. The proceeds from the 2004 issuance of debentures,
which are described below, were used for the purchase of our new
building.
47
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Other Items
The following table summarizes the principal amounts and
variables associated with our long-term debt (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest | |
|
|
Year of |
|
|
|
Year | |
|
|
|
|
|
Rate at | |
|
Principal | |
Issuance |
|
Description |
|
Callable | |
|
Year Due | |
|
Interest Rate Terms |
|
12/31/06 | |
|
Amount | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
2003
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2033 |
|
|
Three-month LIBOR, plus 4.05% |
|
|
9.42% |
|
|
$ |
10,310 |
|
2004
|
|
Senior debentures
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2034 |
|
|
Three-month LIBOR, plus 4.00% |
|
|
9.37% |
|
|
|
13,000 |
|
2004
|
|
Senior debentures
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2034 |
|
|
Three-month LIBOR, plus 4.20% |
|
|
9.57% |
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
2005
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2035 |
|
|
Three-month LIBOR, plus 3.58% |
|
|
8.94% |
|
|
|
20,620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
$ |
55,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We received a total of $53.3 million in net proceeds from
the issuances of the above long-term debt, of which $26.2 was
contributed to the surplus of our Insurance Company Subsidiaries
and the remaining balance was used for general corporate
purposes. Associated with the issuance of the above long-term
debt we incurred approximately $1.7 million in issuance
costs for commissions paid to the placement agents in the
transactions. These issuance costs have been capitalized and are
included in other assets on the balance sheet, which are being
amortized over seven years as a component of interest expense.
The seven year amortization period represents our best estimate
of the estimated useful life of the bonds related to both the
senior debentures and junior subordinated debentures.
The junior subordinated debentures issued in 2003 and 2005, were
issued in conjunction with the issuance of $10.0 million
and $20.0 million in mandatory redeemable trust preferred
securities to a trust formed by an institutional investor from
our unconsolidated subsidiary trusts, respectively.
With the five year period approaching in 2008 for the junior
subordinated debentures issued in 2003, we will be reviewing the
capital strategy associated with refinancing at lower costs
through debentures or equity.
In October 2005, we entered into two interest rate swap
transactions to mitigate our interest rate risk on
$5.0 million and $20.0 million of our senior
debentures and trust preferred securities, respectively. In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 133 Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, these
interest rate swap transactions were recorded at fair value on
the balance sheet and the effective portion of the changes in
fair value are accounted for within other comprehensive income.
The interest differential to be paid or received is accrued and
is recognized as an adjustment to interest expense.
The first interest rate swap transaction, which relates to
$5.0 million of our $12.0 million issuance of senior
debentures, has an effective date of October 6, 2005 and an
ending date of May 24, 2009. We are required to make
certain quarterly fixed rate payments calculated on a notional
amount of $5.0 million, non-amortizing, based on a fixed
annual interest rate of 8.925%. The counterparty is obligated to
make quarterly floating rate payments to us, referencing the
same notional amount, based on the three-month LIBOR, plus 4.20%.
The second interest rate swap transaction, which relates to
$20.0 million of our $20.0 million issuance of trust
preferred securities, has an effective date of October 6,
2005 and ending date of September 16, 2010. We
48
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
are required to make quarterly fixed rate payments calculated on
a notional amount of $20.0 million, non-amortizing, based
on a fixed annual interest rate of 8.34%. The counterparty is
obligated to make quarterly floating rate payments to us,
referencing the same notional amount, based on the three-month
LIBOR, plus 3.58%.
In relation to the above interest rate swaps, the net interest
income received for the year ended December 31, 2006, was
approximately $67,000. For the year ended December 31,
2005, the net interest expense incurred was approximately
$4,000. The total fair value of the interest rate swaps as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, was approximately $200,000 and
$14,000, respectively. Accumulated other comprehensive income at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, included accumulated income on
the cash flow hedge, net of taxes, of approximately $130,000 and
$9,000, respectively
In November 2004, we entered into a revolving line of credit for
up to $25.0 million, which expires in November 2007. We
plan to renew the line of credit upon its expiration and will be
evaluating the renewal terms based upon our overall capital
strategy. We use the revolving line of credit to meet short-term
working capital needs. Under the revolving line of credit, we
and certain of our non-regulated subsidiaries pledged security
interests in certain property and assets of named subsidiaries.
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, we had an outstanding
balance of $7.0 million and $5.0 million,
respectively, on the revolving line of credit.
The revolving line of credit provides for interest at a variable
rate based, at our option, upon either a prime based rate or
LIBOR-based rate. In addition, the revolving line of credit also
provides for an unused facility fee. On prime based borrowings,
the applicable margin ranges from 75 to 25 basis points
below prime. On LIBOR-based borrowings, the applicable margin
ranges from 125 to 175 basis points above LIBOR. The margin
for all loans is dependent on the sum of non-regulated earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization, and non-cash
impairment charges related to intangible assets for the
preceding four quarters, plus dividends paid or payable to us
from subsidiaries during such period (Adjusted
EBITDA). As of December 31, 2006, the weighted
average interest rate for LIBOR-based borrowings was 6.7%.
Debt covenants consist of: (1) maintenance of the ratio of
Adjusted EBITDA to interest expense of 2.0 to 1.0,
(2) minimum net worth of $130.0 million and increasing
annually, commencing June 30, 2005, by fifty percent of the
prior years positive net income, (3) minimum A.M.
Best rating of B, and (4) on an annual basis, a
minimum Risk Based Capital Ratio for Star of 1.75 to 1.00. As of
December 31, 2006, we were in compliance with these
covenants.
Previously, our non-insurance premium finance subsidiary
maintained a line of credit with a bank. At December 31,
2005, this line of credit had an outstanding balance of
$2.0 million. In May 2006, the balance of this loan was
paid in full and the terms of the line of credit were not
renewed.
As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the recorded values of
our investment portfolio, including cash and cash equivalents,
were $527.6 million and $460.2 million, respectively.
The debt securities in the investment portfolio, at
December 31, 2006, were 97.2% investment grade A- or above
bonds as defined by Standard and Poors.
Shareholders equity increased to $201.7 million, or a
book value of $6.93 per common share, at December 31,
2006, compared to $177.4 million, or a book value of
$6.19 per common share, at December 31,
49
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
2005. This $0.74 per share increase in book value primarily
reflects year-to-date
earnings. Return on beginning equity was 12.4% in 2006, compared
to 10.7% in 2005.
On October 28, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized
management to purchase up to 1,000,000 shares of our common
stock in market transactions for a period not to exceed
twenty-four months. For the year ended December 31, 2006,
we did not repurchase any common stock. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, we purchased and retired a total of
772,900 shares of common stock for a total cost of
approximately $4.2 million. Of these shares,
63,000 shares for a total cost of approximately $372,000
related to the current share repurchase plan. As of
December 31, 2006, the cumulative amount we repurchased and
retired under our current share repurchase plan was
63,000 shares of common stock for a total cost of
approximately $372,000. As of December 31, 2006, we have
available up to 937,000 shares remaining to be purchased.
Our Board of Directors did not declare a dividend in 2006 or
2005. When evaluating the declaration of a dividend, our Board
of Directors considers a variety of factors, including but not
limited to, our cash flow, liquidity needs, results of
operations and our overall financial condition. As a holding
company, the ability to pay cash dividends is partially
dependent on dividends and other permitted payments from our
subsidiaries. We did not receive any dividends from our
Insurance Company Subsidiaries in 2006 or 2005.
A significant portion of our consolidated assets represent
assets of our Insurance Company Subsidiaries. The State of
Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Services
(OFIS), restricts the amount of funds that may be
transferred to us in the form of dividends, loans or advances.
These restrictions in general, are as follows: the maximum
discretionary dividend that may be declared, based on data from
the preceding calendar year, is the greater of each insurance
companys net income (excluding realized capital gains) or
ten percent of the insurance companys surplus (excluding
unrealized gains). These dividends are further limited by a
clause in the Michigan law that prohibits an insurer from
declaring dividends except out of surplus earnings of the
company. Earned surplus balances are calculated on a quarterly
basis. Since Star is the parent insurance company, its maximum
dividend calculation represents the combined Insurance Company
Subsidiaries surplus. At December 31, 2006,
Stars earned surplus position was positive
$13.2 million. At December 31, 2005, Star had negative
earned surplus of $7.2 million. Based upon the
December 31, 2006 statutory financial statements, Star may
pay a dividend of up to $13.2 million without the prior
approval of OFIS. No statutory dividends were paid in 2006 or
2005. Refer to the Liquidity and Capital Resources
section above for a description of the potential uses of
such dividends.
Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are required to maintain
certain deposits with regulatory authorities, which totaled
$148.8 million and $128.7 million at December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively.
50
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table is a summary of our contractual obligations
and commitments as of December 31, 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Less Than | |
|
One to | |
|
Three to | |
|
More Than | |
|
|
Total | |
|
One Year | |
|
Three Years | |
|
Five Years | |
|
Five Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Non-regulated companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lines of credit(1)
|
|
$ |
7,000 |
|
|
$ |
7,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Senior debentures, excluding interest(2)
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Junior subordinated debentures, excluding interest(2)
|
|
|
30,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,930 |
|
Operating lease obligations(3)
|
|
|
14,069 |
|
|
|
2,749 |
|
|
|
4,757 |
|
|
|
3,474 |
|
|
|
3,089 |
|
Regulated companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses(4)
|
|
|
501,077 |
|
|
|
140,670 |
|
|
|
179,453 |
|
|
|
73,886 |
|
|
|
107,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
578,076 |
|
|
$ |
150,419 |
|
|
$ |
184,210 |
|
|
$ |
77,360 |
|
|
$ |
166,087 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Relates to our revolving line of credit (excludes interest). |
|
(2) |
Five year call feature associated with debentures, estimated
seven year repayment. |
|
(3) |
Consists of rental obligations under real estate leases related
to branch offices. In addition, includes amounts related to
equipment leases. |
|
(4) |
The loss and loss adjustment expense payments do not have
contractual maturity dates and the exact timing of payments
cannot be predicted with certainty. However, based upon
historical payment patterns, we have included an estimate of our
gross losses and loss adjustment expenses. In addition, we have
anticipated cash receipts on reinsurance recoverables on unpaid
losses and loss adjustment expenses of $198.4 million, of
which we estimate that these payments to be paid for losses and
loss adjustment expenses for the periods less than one year, one
to three years, three to five years, and more than five years,
to be $33.7 million, $64.5 million,
$34.9 million, and $65.3 million, respectively,
resulting in net losses and loss adjustment expenses of
$107.0 million, $115.0 million, $39.0 million,
and $41.7 million, respectively. |
We maintain an investment portfolio with varying maturities that
we believe will provide adequate cash for the payment of claims.
Variable Compensation
We have established two variable compensation plans as an
incentive for performance of our management team. They consist
of an Annual Bonus Plan (Bonus Plan) and a Long-Term
Incentive Plan (LTIP). The Bonus Plan is a
discretionary cash bonus plan premised upon a targeted growth in
net after-tax earnings on a year over year basis. Each year, the
Compensation Committee and our Board of Directors establish a
new target based upon prior year performance and the forecasted
performance levels anticipated for the following year. If the
minimum threshold is met, the Bonus Plan is funded from 0% up to
a maximum of 120% of the targeted bonus pool. The amount of the
bonus pool is established by aggregating the individual targets
for each participant, which is a percentage of salary. At the
end of the year, the Compensation Committee and the Board of
Directors review the Companys performance in relation to
performance targets and then establish the total bonus pool to
be utilized to pay cash bonuses to the management team based
upon overall corporate and individual participant goals.
The LTIP is intended to provide an incentive to management to
improve the performance of the Company over a three year period,
thereby increasing shareholder value. The LTIP is not
discretionary and is
51
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
based upon a target for an average three year return on
beginning equity. If the targets are met and all other terms and
conditions are satisfied, the LTIP awards are paid. The LTIP can
be funded from 0% to 160% of target, based upon the three year
performance of the Company. The LTIP is paid 50% in cash and 50%
in stock. A participants percentage is established by the
Compensation Committee and the Board of Directors in advance of
any new three year LTIP award. The stock component of the LTIP
is paid based upon the closing stock price at the beginning of
the three year LTIP performance period, in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the LTIP.
Both the Bonus Plan and the LTIP are administered by the
Compensation Committee and all awards are reviewed and approved
by the Board of Directors at both inception and at distribution.
Regulatory and Rating Issues
Insurance operations are subject to various leverage tests (e.g.
premium to statutory surplus ratios), which are evaluated by
regulators and rating agencies. Our targets for gross and net
written premium to statutory surplus are 2.8 to 1.0 and 2.25 to
1.0, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, on a statutory
consolidated basis, gross and net premium leverage ratios were
2.0 to 1.0 and 1.6 to 1.0, respectively.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) has adopted a risk-based capital
(RBC) formula to be applied to all property and
casualty insurance companies. The formula measures required
capital and surplus based on an insurance companys
products and investment portfolio and is used as a tool to
evaluate the capital of regulated companies. The RBC formula is
used by state insurance regulators to monitor trends in
statutory capital and surplus for the purpose of initiating
regulatory action. In general, an insurance company must submit
a calculation of its RBC formula to the insurance department of
its state of domicile as of the end of the previous calendar
year. These laws require increasing degrees of regulatory
oversight and intervention as an insurance companys RBC
declines. The level of regulatory oversight ranges from
requiring the insurance company to inform and obtain approval
from the domiciliary insurance commissioner of a comprehensive
financial plan for increasing its RBC to mandatory regulatory
intervention requiring an insurance company to be placed under
regulatory control in a rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding.
The RBC Model Act provides for four different levels of
regulatory attention depending on the ratio of the
companys total adjusted capital, defined as the total of
its statutory capital, surplus and asset valuation reserve, to
its risk-based capital.
At December 31, 2006, all of the Insurance Company
Subsidiaries were in compliance with RBC requirements. Star
reported statutory surplus of $165.1 million and
$141.1 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The calculated RBC was $31.6 million in 2006
and $37.3 million in 2005. The threshold requiring the
minimum regulatory involvement was $63.1 million in 2006
and $74.5 million in 2005.
The NAICs Insurance Regulatory Information System
(IRIS) was developed by a committee of state
insurance regulators and is primarily intended to assist state
insurance departments in executing their statutory mandates to
oversee the financial condition of insurance companies operating
in their respective states. IRIS identifies thirteen industry
ratios and specifies usual values for each ratio.
Departure from the usual values on four or more ratios generally
leads to inquiries or possible further review from individual
state insurance commissioners.
52
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
In 2006, our Insurance Company Subsidiaries generated one ratio
that varied from the usual value range. The
variation and reason for this variation is set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio |
|
Usual Range | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Company: Williamsburg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Agents Balances to Policyholders Surplus
|
|
|
Under 40 |
% |
|
|
44%(1 |
) |
|
|
(1) |
The Gross Agents Balances to Policyholders Surplus
on Williamsburg was impacted by the Intercompany Reinsurance
Agreement, which is described below under Intercompany
Pooling Agreement. Williamsburgs assumed premium
receivable increased $4.7 million as a result of
intercompany pooling. Excluding the intercompany pooling, this
ratio would have been within the usual range for 2006. |
In May 2006, we announced the affirmation of A.M. Best
Companys financial strength rating of B++ (Very Good) for
three of our insurance company subsidiaries: Star Insurance
Company (Star), Savers Property & Casualty
Insurance Company, and Williamsburg National Insurance Company.
Concurrently, A.M. Best upgraded the rating of our other
insurance company subsidiary, Ameritrust Insurance Corporation,
to B++ (Very Good), from B+ (Very Good). Additionally, A.M. Best
upgraded the outlook for all the ratings from stable to
positive. A positive outlook is placed on a companys
rating if its financial and market trends are favorable,
relative to its current rating level.
Reinsurance Considerations
We seek to manage the risk exposure of our Insurance Company
Subsidiaries and our clients through the purchase of
excess-of-loss and
quota share reinsurance. Our reinsurance requirements are
analyzed on a specific program basis to determine the
appropriate retention levels and reinsurance coverage limits. We
secure this reinsurance based on the availability, cost, and
benefits of various reinsurance alternatives.
Reinsurance does not legally discharge an insurer from its
primary liability for the full amount of risks assumed under
insurance policies it issues, but it does make the assuming
reinsurer liable to the insurer to the extent of the reinsurance
ceded. Therefore, we are subject to credit risk with respect to
the obligations of our reinsurers. We manage our credit risk on
reinsurance recoverables by reviewing the financial stability,
A.M. Best rating, capitalization, and credit worthiness of
prospective and existing risk-sharing partners. We customarily
collateralize reinsurance balances due from non-admitted
reinsurers through funds withheld trusts or stand-by letters of
credit issued by highly rated banks. To date, we have not, in
the aggregate, experienced material difficulties in collecting
reinsurance recoverables other than those balances related to
three unaffiliated insurance companies, which are under
regulatory liquidation or control, for which allowances have
been established. The following table sets forth information
relating to our five largest unaffiliated reinsurers based upon
ceded premium (other than client captive quota-share reinsurers)
as of December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance Premium Ceded | |
|
Reinsurance Recoverable | |
|
A.M. Best | |
Reinsurer |
|
December 31, 2006 | |
|
December 31, 2006 | |
|
Rating | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
Employers Reinsurance Corporation
|
|
$ |
8,197 |
|
|
$ |
92,877 |
|
|
|
A+ |
|
Munich American Reinsurance
|
|
|
5,586 |
|
|
|
12,062 |
|
|
|
A |
|
Aspen Insurance UK Ltd.
|
|
|
5,313 |
|
|
|
8,988 |
|
|
|
A |
|
Motors Insurance Company
|
|
|
3,165 |
|
|
|
14,566 |
|
|
|
A- |
|
General Reinsurance Company
|
|
|
2,957 |
|
|
|
10,805 |
|
|
|
A++ |
|
53
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
We have historically maintained an allowance for the potential
exposure to uncollectibility of certain reinsurance balances. At
the end of each quarter, an analysis of these exposures is
conducted to determine the potential exposure to
uncollectibility. The following table sets forth our exposure to
uncollectible reinsurance and related allowances for the years
ending December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Gross Exposure
|
|
$ |
14,815 |
|
|
$ |
14,046 |
|
Collateral or other security
|
|
|
(3,623 |
) |
|
|
(2,749 |
) |
Allowance
|
|
|
(9,731 |
) |
|
|
(9,662 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Exposure
|
|
$ |
1,461 |
|
|
$ |
1,635 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intercompany Pooling Agreement
Intercompany pooling agreements are commonly entered into
between affiliated insurance companies, so as to allow the
companies to utilize the capital and surplus of all of the
companies, rather than each individual company. Under pooling
arrangements, companies share in the insurance business that is
underwritten and allocate the combined premium, losses and
related expenses between the companies within the pooling
arrangement. The Insurance Company Subsidiaries entered into an
Inter-Company Reinsurance Agreement (the Pooling
Agreement). This Pooling Agreement includes Star,
Ameritrust Insurance Corporation (Ameritrust),
Savers Property and Casualty Insurance Company
(Savers) and Williamsburg National Insurance Company
(Williamsburg). Pursuant to the Pooling Agreement,
Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg have agreed to cede to Star
and Star has agreed to reinsure 100% of the liabilities and
expenses of Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg, relating to all
insurance and reinsurance policies issued by them. In return,
Star agrees to cede and Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg have
agreed to reinsure Star for their respective percentages of the
liabilities and expenses of Star. Annually, we examine the
Pooling Agreement for any changes to the ceded percentage for
the liabilities and expenses. Any changes to the Pooling
Agreement must be submitted to the applicable regulatory
authorities for approval.
Convertible Note
In July 2005, we made a $2.5 million loan, at an effective
interest rate equal to the three-month LIBOR, plus 5.2%, to an
unaffiliated insurance agency. In December 2005, we loaned an
additional $3.5 million to the unaffiliated insurance
agency. The original $2.5 million demand note was replaced
with a $6.0 million convertible note. The effective
interest rate of the convertible note is equal to the
three-month LIBOR, plus 5.2% and is due December 20, 2010.
This agency has been a producer for us for over ten years. As
security for the loan, the borrower granted us a security
interest in its accounts, cash, general intangibles, and other
intangible property. Also, the shareholder then pledged 100% of
the common shares of three insurance agencies, the common shares
owned by the shareholder in another agency, and has executed a
personal guaranty. This note is convertible upon our option
based upon a pre-determined formula, beginning in 2008. The
conversion feature of this note is considered an embedded
derivative pursuant to SFAS No. 133, and therefore is
accounted for separately from the note. At December 31,
2006, the estimated fair value of the derivative is not material
to the financial statements.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 155, Accounting
for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments. Under
current generally accepted accounting principles, an entity that
holds a financial instrument with an embedded derivative must
bifurcate the financial instrument, resulting in the host and
the embedded derivative being accounted for separately.
SFAS No. 155 permits, but does not require, entities
to account for
54
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
financial instruments with an embedded derivative at fair value
thus negating the need to bifurcate the instrument between its
host and the embedded derivative. SFAS No. 155 is
effective for fiscal periods beginning after September 15,
2006. We will evaluate the impact of SFAS No. 155, but
believe the adoption of SFAS No. 155 will not impact
our consolidated financial statements.
In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156,
Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets.
SFAS No. 156 amends FASB Statement No. 140,
Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial
Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, to require
that all separately recognized servicing assets and servicing
liabilities be initially measured at fair value, if practicable.
SFAS No. 156 permits, but does not require, the
subsequent measurement of separately recognized servicing assets
and servicing liabilities at fair value. An entity that uses
derivative instruments to mitigate the risks inherent in
servicing assets and servicing liabilities is required to
account for those derivative instruments at fair value.
SFAS No. 156 is effective for fiscal periods beginning
after September 15, 2006. We will evaluate the impact of
SFAS No. 156, but believe the adoption of
SFAS No. 156 will not impact our consolidated
financial statements.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109
(FIN 48), which becomes effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2006. FIN 48
clarifies the accounting and reporting for uncertain tax
positions. This interpretation prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement
recognition, measurement, and presentation of uncertain tax
positions taken or expected to be taken in an income tax return.
We have evaluated the impact of FIN 48 and have determined
it will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements or disclosure requirements upon adoption.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which becomes
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. We will evaluate the impact of
SFAS No. 157, but believe the adoption of
SFAS No. 157 will not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158,
Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension
and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).
SFAS No. 158 requires the recognition, on a
prospective basis, of the funded status of a companys
defined benefit plan as an asset or liability. In addition, any
unrecognized gains and losses or prior service costs shall be
recognized as a component of accumulated other comprehensive
income. SFAS No. 158 will also require additional
disclosures in the notes to financial statements. In addition,
SFAS No. 158 requires companies to measure plan assets
and obligations as of the year-end balance sheet date.
SFAS No. 158 is effective for fiscal years ending
after December 15, 2006, with early application encouraged.
The measurement date provisions are effective for the fiscal
year ending December 31, 2008. We will evaluate the impact
of SFAS No. 158, but believe the adoption of
SFAS No. 158 will not impact our consolidated
financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115. SFAS No. 159 will
permit entities to measure many financial instruments and
certain other assets and liabilities at fair value on an
instrument-by-instrument basis. The objective of
SFAS No. 159 is to improve financial reporting and
reduce the volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring
related assets and liabilities differently.
SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. We will evaluate the potential
impact SFAS No. 159 will have on our consolidated
financial statements.
55
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
Related Party Transactions
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, we held an
$871,000 and $859,000 note receivable, including $210,000 of
accrued interest at December 31, 2006, from one of our
executive officers. Accrued interest at December 31, 2005
was $198,000. This note arose from a transaction in late 1998 in
which we loaned the officer funds to exercise 64,718 common
stock options to cover the exercise price and the taxes incurred
as a result of the exercise. The note bears interest equal to
our borrowing rate and is due on demand any time after
January 1, 2002. The loan is partially collateralized by
64,718 shares of our common stock under a stock pledge
agreement. For the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
$31,500 and $42,000, respectively, have been paid against the
accrued interest on the loan. On June 1, 2001, the officer
entered into an employment agreement which provides the note is
a non-recourse loan and our sole legal remedy in the event of a
default is the right to reclaim the shares pledged under the
stock pledge agreement. As of December 31, 2006, the
cumulative amount that has been paid against this loan was
$119,000. Refer to Note 16 Related Party
Transaction for further information.
Item 7A. Qualitative and
Quantitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Market risk is the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in
market rates and prices, such as interest rates as well as other
relevant market rate or price changes. The volatility and
liquidity in the markets in which the underlying assets are
traded directly influence market risk. The following is a
discussion of our primary risk exposures and how those exposures
are currently managed as of December 31, 2006. Our market
risk sensitive instruments are primarily related to fixed income
securities, which are available for sale and not held for
trading purposes.
Interest rate risk is managed within the context of an asset and
liability management strategy where the target duration for the
fixed income portfolio is based on the estimate of the liability
duration and takes into consideration our surplus. The
investment policy guidelines provide for a fixed income
portfolio duration of between three and a half and five and a
half years. At December 31, 2006, our fixed income
portfolio had a modified duration of 3.93, compared to 3.38 at
December 31, 2005.
At December 31, 2006, the fair value of our investment
portfolio was $484.7 million. Our market risk to the
investment portfolio is interest rate risk associated with debt
securities. Our exposure to equity price risk is not
significant. Our investment philosophy is one of maximizing
after-tax earnings and has historically included significant
investments in tax-exempt bonds. During 2005 and 2006, we
continued to increase our holdings of tax-exempt securities
based on our return to profitability and our desire to maximize
after-tax investment income. For our investment portfolio, there
were no significant changes in our primary market risk exposures
or in how those exposures are managed compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005. We do not anticipate significant changes
in our primary market risk exposures or in how those exposures
are managed in future reporting periods based upon what is known
or expected to be in effect.
A sensitivity analysis is defined as the measurement of
potential loss in future earnings, fair values, or cash flows of
market sensitive instruments resulting from one or more selected
hypothetical changes in interest rates and other market rates or
prices over a selected period. In our sensitivity analysis
model, a hypothetical change in market rates is selected that is
expected to reflect reasonable possible near-term changes in
those rates. Near term means a period of up to one
year from the date of the consolidated financial statements. In
our sensitivity model, we use fair values to measure our
potential loss of debt securities assuming an upward parallel
shift in interest rates to measure the hypothetical change in
fair values. The table below presents our
56
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
models estimate of changes in fair values given a change
in interest rates. Dollar values are rounded and in thousands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rates Down 100bps | |
|
Rates Unchanged | |
|
Rates Up 100bps | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Market Value
|
|
$ |
504,727 |
|
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
$ |
464,642 |
|
Yield to Maturity or Call
|
|
|
3.62 |
% |
|
|
4.62 |
% |
|
|
5.62 |
% |
Effective Duration
|
|
|
3.94 |
|
|
|
4.09 |
|
|
|
4.24 |
|
The other financial instruments, which include cash and cash
equivalents, equity securities, premium receivables, reinsurance
recoverables, line of credit and other assets and liabilities,
when included in the sensitivity model, do not produce a
material loss in fair values.
Our debentures are subject to variable interest rates. Thus, our
interest expense on these debentures is directly correlated to
market interest rates. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, we
had debentures of $55.9 million. At this level, a
100 basis point (1%) change in market rates would change
annual interest expense by $559,000.
In October 2005, we entered into two interest rate swap
transactions to mitigate our interest rate risk on
$5.0 million and $20.0 million of our senior
debentures and trust preferred securities, respectively. We
accrue for these transactions in accordance with
SFAS No. 133 Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, as subsequently
amended. These interest rate swap transactions have been
designated as a cash flow hedges and are deemed highly effective
hedges under SFAS No. 133. In accordance with
SFAS No. 133, these interest rate swap transactions
are recorded at fair value on the balance sheet and the
effective portion of any changes in fair value are accounted for
within other comprehensive income. The interest differential to
be paid or received is being accrued and is being recognized as
an adjustment to interest expense.
In addition, our revolving line of credit under which we can
borrow up to $25.0 million is subject to variable interest
rates. This line of credit expires November 2007. We plan to
renew the line of credit upon its expiration and will be
evaluating the renewal terms based upon our overall capital
strategy. Thus, our interest expense on the revolving line of
credit is directly correlated to market interest rates. At
December 31, 2006, we had $7.0 million outstanding on
this revolving line of credit. At this level, a 100 basis
point (1%) change in market rates would have changed interest
expense by $70,000. At December 31, 2005, we had
$5.0 million outstanding on this revolving line of credit.
At this level, a 100 basis point (1%) change in market
rates would have changed interest expense by $50,000.
Item 8. Financial Statements
and Supplementary Data
Refer to list of Financial Statement Schedules and
Note 19 Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Item 9. Changes in and
Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and
Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.
Our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Exchange
Act), which we refer to as disclosure controls, are
controls and procedures that are designed with the objective of
ensuring that information required to be disclosed in our
reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this annual
report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within
the
57
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and forms. Disclosure controls are also
designed with the objective of ensuring that such information is
accumulated and communicated to our management, including our
Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. There are inherent limitations to the effectiveness
of any control system. A control system, no matter how well
conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance
that its objectives are met. No evaluation of controls can
provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances
of fraud, if any, within our Company have been detected.
As of December 31, 2006, an evaluation was carried out
under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of disclosure controls. Based upon that evaluation,
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
concluded that the design and operation of these disclosure
controls were effective to ensure that material information
relating to us is made known to management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, particularly
during the period when our periodic reports are being prepared.
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in Rules 13a-15(f)
and 15d-15(f) under the
Exchange Act). Our internal control system was designed to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Because of
its inherent limitations, internal controls over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also,
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods
are subject to the risk that controls may be inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2006. In making this assessment,
management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO) in Internal Control Integrated
Framework. Based on our assessment, we concluded that, as
of December 31, 2006, our internal controls over financial
reporting was effective based on those criteria.
Our managements assessment of the effectiveness of
internal controls over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, has been audited by Ernst &
Young LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, as
stated in their report included herein.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in our internal control over
financial reporting during the most recent quarter ended
December 31, 2006, which have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls
over financial reporting.
|
|
Item 9B. |
Other Information |
None.
PART III
Certain information required by Part III is omitted from
this Report in that the Registrant will file a definitive Proxy
Statement pursuant to Regulation 14A (the Proxy
Statement) not later than 120 days after
58
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
the end of the fiscal year covered by this report and certain
information included therein is incorporated herein by
reference. Only those sections of the Proxy Statement that
specifically address the items set forth herein are incorporated
by reference.
|
|
Item 10. |
Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate
Governance |
The information required by this item is included under the
captions Information about the Nominees, the Incumbent
Directors and Other Executive Officers, Corporate
Governance, Code of Conduct, Report of
the Audit Committee, and Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance of our Proxy
Statement relating to our Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be
held on May 9, 2007, which is hereby incorporated by
reference. Our Code of Conduct can be found on our website
www.meadowbrook.com.
|
|
Item 11. |
Executive Compensation |
The information required by this item is included under the
captions Compensation of Executive Officers,
Director Compensation, Report of the
Compensation Committee of the Board on Executive
Compensation, and Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation of our Proxy
Statement relating to our Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be
held on May 9, 2007, which is hereby incorporated by
reference.
|
|
Item 12. |
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
The information required by this item is included under the
caption Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and Management of our Proxy Statement relating to our
Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 9, 2007,
which is hereby incorporated by reference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity Compensation Plan Information | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Number of Securities | |
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available for | |
|
|
Number of Securities to | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
Future Issuance Under | |
|
|
be Issued upon Exercise | |
|
Exercise Price of | |
|
Equity Compensation | |
|
|
of Outstanding Options, | |
|
Outstanding Options, | |
|
Plans (Excluding | |
|
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Securities in Column (a)) | |
Plan Category |
|
(a) | |
|
(b) | |
|
(c) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
391,678 |
|
|
$ |
7.38 |
|
|
|
2,379,580 |
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
391,678 |
|
|
$ |
7.38 |
|
|
|
2,379,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 13. |
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and
Director Independence |
The information required by this item is included under the
captions Certain Relationships and Related Party
Transactions and Independence
Determination of our Proxy Statement relating to our
Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 9, 2007,
which is hereby incorporated by reference.
|
|
Item 14. |
Principal Accountant Fees and Services |
The information required by this item is included under the
caption The Second Proposal on Which You are Voting on
Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm of our Proxy Statement relating to our
Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 9, 2007,
which is hereby incorporated by reference.
59
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS continued
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15. |
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules |
(A) The following documents are filed as part of this
Report:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
|
|
| |
1.
|
|
List of Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
69-96 |
|
2.
|
|
Financial Statement Schedules
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
98-101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
102-104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
107 |
|
3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. as of December 31, 2006
and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income,
comprehensive income, shareholders equity, and cash flows
for the years then ended. Our audit also included the financial
statement schedules for the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005 listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial
statements and schedules are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express
opinions on these financial statements and schedules based on
our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated results of
its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended, in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial
statement schedules for the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005, when considered in relation to the basic financial
statements taken as a whole, present fairly in all material
respects the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.s
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in
Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our
report dated March 9, 2007 expressed an unqualified opinion
thereon.
Detroit, Michigan
March 9, 2007
61
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.:
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting, that Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.
(Meadowbrook) maintained effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on
criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO
criteria). Meadowbrooks management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on managements assessment and an opinion on the
effectiveness of the companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, managements assessment that Meadowbrook
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2006, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based on the COSO criteria. Also, in our opinion,
Meadowbrook maintained, in all material respects, effective
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Meadowbrook as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of income, comprehensive income, shareholders
equity, and cash flows for the years then ended and our report
dated March 9, 2007 expressed an unqualified opinion
thereon.
Detroit, Michigan
March 9, 2007
62
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.:
In our opinion, the consolidated statements of income, of
comprehensive income, of shareholders equity, and of cash
flows for the year ended December 31, 2004 present fairly,
in all material respects, the results of operations and cash
flows of Meadowbrook Insurance Group Inc. and its subsidiaries
for the year ended December 31, 2004, in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement
schedules for the year ended December 31, 2004 listed in
the index appearing under Item 15 (a) (2) present
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth
therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated
financial statements. These financial statements and financial
statement schedules are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and financial statement schedules based on
our audits. We conducted our audits of these statements in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about
whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the
overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Chicago, Illinois
March 16, 2005
63
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, | |
|
|
except share data) | |
ASSETS |
Investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities available for sale, at fair value (amortized
cost of $486,213 and $403,947 in 2006 and 2005, respectively)
|
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
$ |
402,195 |
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
42,876 |
|
|
|
58,038 |
|
|
Accrued investment income
|
|
|
5,884 |
|
|
|
4,953 |
|
|
Premiums and agent balances receivable (net of allowance of
$2,948 and $3,901 in 2006 and 2005, respectively)
|
|
|
85,578 |
|
|
|
84,807 |
|
|
Reinsurance recoverable on:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid losses
|
|
|
4,257 |
|
|
|
15,327 |
|
|
|
Unpaid losses
|
|
|
198,422 |
|
|
|
187,254 |
|
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums
|
|
|
20,425 |
|
|
|
24,588 |
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs
|
|
|
27,902 |
|
|
|
26,371 |
|
|
Deferred income taxes, net
|
|
|
15,732 |
|
|
|
16,630 |
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
31,502 |
|
|
|
30,802 |
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
51,698 |
|
|
|
50,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
969,000 |
|
|
$ |
901,344 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
Unearned premiums
|
|
|
144,575 |
|
|
|
140,990 |
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
Debentures
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
25,384 |
|
|
|
26,667 |
|
|
Reinsurance funds held and balances payable
|
|
|
15,124 |
|
|
|
15,240 |
|
|
Payable to insurance companies
|
|
|
5,442 |
|
|
|
6,684 |
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
12,775 |
|
|
|
12,791 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
767,307 |
|
|
|
723,979 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 stated value; authorized
50,000,000 shares; 29,107,818 and 28,672,009 shares
issued and outstanding
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
126,828 |
|
|
|
124,819 |
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
76,282 |
|
|
|
54,248 |
|
|
Note receivable from officer
|
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
(859 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(837 |
) |
|
|
(1,130 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
201,693 |
|
|
|
177,365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
969,000 |
|
|
$ |
901,344 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
64
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
$ |
327,287 |
|
|
$ |
325,522 |
|
|
$ |
288,868 |
|
|
|
Ceded
|
|
|
(72,367 |
) |
|
|
(75,563 |
) |
|
|
(74,375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earned premiums
|
|
|
254,920 |
|
|
|
249,959 |
|
|
|
214,493 |
|
|
Net commissions and fees
|
|
|
41,172 |
|
|
|
35,916 |
|
|
|
40,535 |
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
22,075 |
|
|
|
17,975 |
|
|
|
14,911 |
|
|
Net realized gains
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
318,236 |
|
|
|
304,017 |
|
|
|
270,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
|
212,383 |
|
|
|
237,775 |
|
|
|
212,337 |
|
|
Reinsurance recoveries
|
|
|
(66,090 |
) |
|
|
(86,233 |
) |
|
|
(76,399 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
|
146,293 |
|
|
|
151,542 |
|
|
|
135,938 |
|
|
Salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
54,569 |
|
|
|
51,331 |
|
|
|
52,297 |
|
|
Policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses
|
|
|
50,479 |
|
|
|
44,439 |
|
|
|
33,424 |
|
|
Other administrative expenses
|
|
|
29,414 |
|
|
|
27,183 |
|
|
|
25,964 |
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
5,976 |
|
|
|
3,856 |
|
|
|
2,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
286,731 |
|
|
|
278,351 |
|
|
|
249,904 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes and equity earnings
|
|
|
31,505 |
|
|
|
25,666 |
|
|
|
20,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal and state income tax expense
|
|
|
9,599 |
|
|
|
7,757 |
|
|
|
6,352 |
|
|
Equity earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
0.62 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.75 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
Weighted average number of common shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
28,963,228 |
|
|
|
28,961,229 |
|
|
|
29,048,069 |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
29,566,141 |
|
|
|
29,653,067 |
|
|
|
29,420,508 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
65
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains (losses) on securities
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
(6,023 |
) |
|
|
(2,364 |
) |
|
|
Net deferred derivative gain hedging activity
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deconsolidation of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
Less: reclassification adjustment for gains (losses) included in
net income
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
(5,958 |
) |
|
|
(2,631 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
22,327 |
|
|
$ |
11,952 |
|
|
$ |
11,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
66
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional | |
|
|
|
Note | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Total | |
|
|
Common | |
|
Paid-In | |
|
Retained | |
|
Receivable | |
|
Income | |
|
Shareholders | |
|
|
Stock | |
|
Capital | |
|
Earnings | |
|
from Officer | |
|
(Loss) | |
|
Equity | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Balances January 1, 2004
|
|
$ |
290 |
|
|
$ |
125,181 |
|
|
$ |
23,069 |
|
|
$ |
(886 |
) |
|
$ |
7,459 |
|
|
$ |
155,113 |
|
Unrealized depreciation on available for sale securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,586 |
) |
|
|
(2,586 |
) |
Deconsolidation of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Long term incentive plan; stock award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
650 |
|
Stock-based employee compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
Issuance of 54,500 shares of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
185 |
|
Retirement of 2,103 shares of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Note receivable from an officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances December 31, 2004
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
126,085 |
|
|
|
37,175 |
|
|
|
(868 |
) |
|
|
4,828 |
|
|
|
167,510 |
|
Unrealized depreciation on available for sale securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,967 |
) |
|
|
(5,967 |
) |
Net deferred derivative gain hedging activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Long term incentive plan; stock award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
923 |
|
Stock-based employee compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
Issuance of 382,825 shares of common stock
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,197 |
|
Retirement of 785,648 shares of common stock
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(3,423 |
) |
|
|
(837 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,267 |
) |
Note receivable from an officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,910 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,910 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances December 31, 2005
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
124,819 |
|
|
|
54,248 |
|
|
|
(859 |
) |
|
|
(1,130 |
) |
|
|
177,365 |
|
Unrealized appreciation on available for sale securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Net deferred derivative gain hedging activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Long term incentive plan; stock award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
897 |
|
Stock-based employee compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121 |
|
Issuance of 791,038 shares of common stock
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,161 |
|
Retirement of 355,229 shares of common stock
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(3,162 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,166 |
) |
Note receivable from an officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances December 31, 2006
|
|
$ |
291 |
|
|
$ |
126,828 |
|
|
$ |
76,282 |
|
|
$ |
(871 |
) |
|
$ |
(837 |
) |
|
$ |
201,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
67
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of other intangible assets
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred debenture issuance costs
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
Depreciation of furniture, equipment, and building
|
|
|
2,553 |
|
|
|
2,452 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
Net accretion of discount and premiums on bonds
|
|
|
2,646 |
|
|
|
2,395 |
|
|
|
1,856 |
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on sale of investments
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
(337 |
) |
|
|
Gain on sale of fixed assets
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
Stock-based employee compensation
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
Incremental tax benefits from stock options exercised
|
|
|
(1,532 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long term incentive plan expense
|
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
Deferred income tax expense
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
1,347 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease (increase) in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums and agent balances receivable
|
|
|
(771 |
) |
|
|
(713 |
) |
|
|
(6,277 |
) |
|
|
Reinsurance recoverable on paid and unpaid losses
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(33,513 |
) |
|
|
(2,445 |
) |
|
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums
|
|
|
4,162 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
(5,157 |
) |
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs
|
|
|
(1,531 |
) |
|
|
(1,204 |
) |
|
|
(5,773 |
) |
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(1,044 |
) |
|
|
5,612 |
|
|
|
2,772 |
|
|
Increase (decrease) in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
|
42,400 |
|
|
|
80,521 |
|
|
|
38,692 |
|
|
|
Unearned premiums
|
|
|
3,585 |
|
|
|
6,688 |
|
|
|
24,625 |
|
|
|
Payable to insurance companies
|
|
|
(1,242 |
) |
|
|
(307 |
) |
|
|
(863 |
) |
|
|
Reinsurance funds held and balances payable
|
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
(2,591 |
) |
|
|
3,659 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
718 |
|
|
|
609 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
52,257 |
|
|
|
64,037 |
|
|
|
56,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
74,291 |
|
|
|
81,947 |
|
|
|
70,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of debt securities available for sale
|
|
|
(201,920 |
) |
|
|
(203,789 |
) |
|
|
(115,954 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from sale of equity securities available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,409 |
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of debt securities available
for sale
|
|
|
116,978 |
|
|
|
122,317 |
|
|
|
47,362 |
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(4,850 |
) |
|
|
(15,810 |
) |
|
|
(5,244 |
) |
|
|
Purchase of books of business
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
(3,557 |
) |
|
|
(446 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
Deconsolidation of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,218 |
) |
|
|
Loan receivable
|
|
|
(202 |
) |
|
|
(5,905 |
) |
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
Net cash deposited in funds held
|
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
2,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(90,299 |
) |
|
|
(105,602 |
) |
|
|
(70,765 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from lines of credit
|
|
|
14,078 |
|
|
|
14,307 |
|
|
|
10,489 |
|
|
|
Payment of lines of credit
|
|
|
(14,078 |
) |
|
|
(19,451 |
) |
|
|
(15,851 |
) |
|
|
Book overdrafts
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
Net proceeds from debentures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,400 |
|
|
|
24,250 |
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
Share repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,191 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incremental tax benefits from stock options exercised
|
|
|
1,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financing activities
|
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
11,818 |
|
|
|
19,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(15,162 |
) |
|
|
(11,837 |
) |
|
|
19,228 |
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
58,038 |
|
|
|
69,875 |
|
|
|
50,647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
$ |
42,876 |
|
|
$ |
58,038 |
|
|
$ |
69,875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$ |
5,616 |
|
|
$ |
3,428 |
|
|
$ |
1,902 |
|
|
|
Net income taxes paid
|
|
$ |
9,159 |
|
|
$ |
6,404 |
|
|
$ |
5,578 |
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Non Cash Investing and Financing
Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit from stock options
|
|
$ |
1,532 |
|
|
$ |
105 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
|
Stock-based employee compensation
|
|
$ |
121 |
|
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
$ |
78 |
|
|
|
Accrued liability for purchase of building(1)
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
11,583 |
|
|
|
(1) |
On January 19, 2005, the Company closed on the purchase of
its new headquarters in Southfield, Michigan, with a cash
settlement of $11.6 million paid to the developer. |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
68
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
1. |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP), which differ from statutory
accounting practices prescribed or permitted for insurance
companies by regulatory authorities. Prescribed statutory
accounting practices include a variety of publications of the
National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC), as well as state laws, regulations and
general administrative rules. Permitted statutory accounting
practices encompass all accounting practices not so prescribed.
The consolidated financial statements include accounts, after
elimination of intercompany accounts and transactions, of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. (the Company), its
wholly owned subsidiary Star Insurance Company
(Star), and Stars wholly owned subsidiaries,
Savers Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Williamsburg
National Insurance Company, and Ameritrust Insurance Corporation
(which are collectively referred to as the Insurance
Company Subsidiaries), and Preferred Insurance Company,
Ltd. The consolidated financial statements also include
Meadowbrook, Inc., Crest Financial Corporation, and their
subsidiaries.
Pursuant to Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation
Number (FIN) 46(R), the Company does not consolidate
its subsidiaries, Meadowbrook Capital Trust I and II (the
Trusts), as they are not variable interest entities
and the Company is not the primary beneficiary of the Trusts.
The consolidated financial statements, however, include the
equity earnings of the Trusts. In addition and in accordance
with FIN 46(R), the Company does not consolidate its
subsidiary American Indemnity Insurance Company, Ltd.
(American Indemnity). While the Company and its
subsidiary Star are the common shareholders, they are not the
primary beneficiaries of American Indemnity. The consolidated
financial statements, however, include the equity earnings of
American Indemnity.
Business
The Company, through its subsidiaries, is engaged primarily in
developing and managing alternative risk management programs for
defined client groups and their members. These services include:
risk management consulting, claims administration and handling,
loss control and prevention, and reinsurance placement, along
with various types of property and casualty insurance coverage,
including workers compensation, commercial multiple peril,
general liability, commercial auto liability, and inland marine.
The Company, through its Insurance Company Subsidiaries, issues
insurance policies for risk-sharing and fully insured programs.
The Company retains underwriting risk in these insurance
programs, which may result in fluctuations in earnings. The
Company also operates retail insurance agencies, which primarily
place commercial insurance as well as personal property,
casualty, life and accident and health insurance, with multiple
insurance carriers. The Company does not have significant
exposures to environmental/asbestos and catastrophic coverages.
Insurance coverage is primarily provided to associations or
similar groups of members, commonly referred to as programs.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. While management
believes the amounts included in the consolidated financial
statements reflect managements best estimates and
assumptions, actual results may differ from those estimates.
69
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand and highly liquid
short-term investments. The Company considers all short-term
investments purchased with an original maturity of three months
or less to be cash equivalents.
Investments
The Companys investment securities at December 31,
2006 and 2005, are classified as available for sale. Investments
classified as available for sale are available to be sold in the
future in response to the Companys liquidity needs,
changes in market interest rates, tax strategies and
asset-liability management strategies, among other reasons.
Available for sale securities are reported at fair value, with
unrealized gains and losses reported in the accumulated other
comprehensive income component of shareholders equity, net
of deferred taxes.
Realized gains or losses on sale of investments are determined
on the basis of specific costs of the investments. Dividend
income is recognized when declared and interest income is
recognized when earned. Discount or premium on debt securities
purchased at other than par value is amortized using the
effective yield method. Investments with other than temporary
declines in fair value are written down to their estimated net
fair value and the related realized losses are recognized in
income.
Other Than Temporary Impairments of Securities and Unrealized
Losses on Investments
The Companys investment portfolio is primarily invested in
debt securities classified as available for sale, with a
concentration in fixed income securities of a high quality. The
Companys policy for the valuation of temporarily impaired
securities is to determine impairment based on analysis of the
following factors: (1) rating downgrade or other credit
event (e.g., failure to pay interest when due);
(2) financial condition and near-term prospects of the
issuer, including any specific events which may influence the
operations of the issuer such as changes in technology or
discontinuance of a business segment; (3) prospects for the
issuers industry segment, and (4) intent and ability
of the Company to retain the investment for a period of time
sufficient to allow for anticipated recovery in market value.
The Company evaluates its investments in securities to determine
other than temporary impairment, no less than quarterly.
Investments that are deemed other than temporarily impaired are
written down to their estimated net fair value and the related
losses are recognized in operations. There were no impaired
investments written down in 2006, 2005, and 2004.
Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses and Reinsurance
Recoverables
The liability for losses and loss adjustment expenses
(LAE) represent case base estimates of reported
unpaid losses and LAE and actuarial estimates of incurred but
not reported losses (IBNR) and LAE. In addition, the
liability for losses and loss adjustment expenses represents
estimates received from ceding reinsurers on assumed business.
Such liabilities, by necessity, are based upon estimates and,
while management believes the amount of its reserves is
adequate, the ultimate liability may be greater or less than the
estimate.
Reserves related to the Companys direct business and
assumed business it manages directly, are established through
transactions processed through the Companys internal
systems and related controls. Accordingly, case reserves are
established on a current basis, and regularly reviewed and
updated as additional information becomes available. IBNR is
determined utilizing various actuarial methods based upon
historical data. Ultimate reserve estimates related to assumed
business from residual markets are provided by individual states
on a two quarter lag and include an estimated reserve based upon
actuarial methods for this lag. Assumed business which is
subsequently 100% retroceded to participating reinsurers relates
to business previously discontinued and now is in run-off.
Finally, in relation to assumed business from other sources, the
70
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Company receives case and paid loss data within a forty-five day
reporting period and develops estimates for IBNR based on
current and historical data.
In addition to case reserves and in accordance with industry
practice, the Company maintains estimates of reserves for losses
and LAE incurred but not yet reported. The Company projects an
estimate of ultimate losses and LAE expenses at each reporting
date. The difference between the projected ultimate loss and LAE
reserves and the case loss and LAE reserves, is carried as IBNR
reserves. By using both estimates of reported claims and IBNR
determined using generally accepted actuarial reserving
techniques, the Company estimates the ultimate liability for
losses and LAE, net of reinsurance recoverables.
Reinsurance recoverables represent (1) amounts currently
due from reinsurers on paid losses and LAE, (2) amounts
recoverable from reinsurers on case basis estimates of reported
losses and LAE, and (3) amounts recoverable from reinsurers
on actuarial estimates of incurred but not reported losses and
LAE. Such recoverables, by necessity, are based upon estimates
and, while management believes that the amount accrued is
collectible, the ultimate recoverable may be greater or less
than the amount accrued.
The methods for making such estimates and for establishing the
loss reserves and reinsurance recoverables are continually
reviewed and updated. There were no significant changes in key
assumptions during 2006, 2005 and 2004.
Revenue Recognition
Premiums written, which include direct, assumed, and ceded are
recognized as earned on a pro rata basis over the life of the
policy term. Unearned premiums represent the portion of premiums
written that are applicable to the unexpired terms of policies
in force. Provisions for unearned premiums on reinsurance
assumed from others are made on the basis of ceding reports when
received and actuarial estimates.
For the year ending December 31, 2006, total assumed
written premiums were $83.9 million, of which
$72.6 million, relates to assumed business we manage
directly, and therefore, no estimation is involved. The
remaining $11.3 million of assumed written premiums
includes $10.1 million related to residual markets.
Assumed premium estimates are specifically related to the
mandatory assumed pool business from the National Council on
Compensation Insurance (NCCI), or residual market
business. The pool cedes workers compensation business to
participating companies based upon the individual companys
market share by state. The activity is reported from the NCCI to
participating companies on a two quarter lag. To accommodate
this lag, the Company estimates premium and loss activity based
on historical and market based results. Historically, the
Company has not experienced any material difficulties or
disputes in collecting balances from NCCI; and therefore, no
provision for doubtful accounts is recorded related to the
assumed premium estimate.
In addition, certain premiums are subject to retrospective
premium adjustments. Premium is recognized over the term of the
insurance contract.
Fee income, which includes risk management consulting, loss
control, and claims services, is recognized during the period
the services are provided. Depending on the terms of the
contract, claims processing fees are recognized as revenue over
the estimated life of the claims, or the estimated life of the
contract. For those contracts that provide services beyond the
expiration or termination of the contract, fees are deferred in
an amount equal to managements estimate of the
Companys obligation to continue to provide services.
Commission income, which includes reinsurance placement, is
recorded on the later of the effective date or the billing date
of the policies on which they were earned. Commission income is
reported net of any sub-producer commission expense. Any
commission adjustments that occur subsequent to the earnings
process are recognized upon notification from the insurance
companies. Profit sharing commissions from insurance companies
are recognized when determinable, which is when such commissions
are received.
71
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company reviews, on an ongoing basis, the collectibility of
its receivables and establishes an allowance for estimated
uncollectible accounts.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs
Commissions and other costs of acquiring insurance business that
vary with and are primarily related to the production of new and
renewal business are deferred and amortized over the terms of
the policies or reinsurance treaties to which they relate.
Investment earnings are anticipated in determining the
recoverability of such deferred amounts. The Company reduces
these costs for premium deficiencies. There were no premium
deficiencies for the years ending December 31, 2006, 2005
and 2004.
Participating Policyholder Dividends
The Companys method for determining policyholder dividends
is a combination of subjective and objective decisions, which
may include loss ratio analysis for the specific program and the
Companys overall business strategy. The Company determines
the total dividends to be paid and then obtains the approval of
the Board of Directors to pay up to a certain amount. At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had $996,000 and
$596,000 accrued for policyholder dividends, respectively.
Furniture and Equipment
Furniture and equipment are stated at cost, net of accumulated
depreciation, and are depreciated using the straight-line method
over the estimated useful lives of the assets, generally three
to ten years. Upon sale or retirement, the cost of the asset and
related accumulated depreciation are eliminated from their
respective accounts, and the resulting gain or loss is included
in income. Repairs and maintenance are charged to operations
when incurred.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
The Company is required to test, at least annually, all existing
goodwill for impairment using a fair value approach, on a
reporting unit basis. The Companys annual assessment date
for goodwill impairment testing is October 1st. Also
pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 142 Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, the Company is required to test for
impairment more frequently if events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the asset might be impaired. In addition, the
Company has an other intangible asset which has an indefinite
life and is evaluated annually in accordance with
SFAS No. 142. The Companys remaining other
intangible assets are being amortized over a five-year period.
Income Taxes
The Company accounts for its income taxes under the asset and
liability method. Deferred federal income taxes are recognized
for the tax consequences of temporary differences by
applying enacted statutory tax rates to differences between the
financial statement carrying amounts and the tax basis of
existing assets and liabilities.
At December 31, 2006, the Company had a deferred tax asset
of $15.7 million. Realization of the deferred tax asset is
dependent upon generating sufficient taxable income to absorb
the applicable reversing temporary differences. At
December 31, 2006, management concluded the positive
evidence supporting the generation of future taxable income
sufficient to recognize the deferred tax asset, without a
valuation allowance. This positive evidence includes cumulative
pre-tax income of $77.5 million for the three years ended
December 31, 2006.
72
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock Options
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment,
using the modified prospective application transition
method. The Company previously adopted the requirements of
recording stock options consistent with SFAS 123 and
accounting for the change in accounting principle using the
prospective method in accordance with SFAS No. 148,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
Transition and Disclosure an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 123. Under the prospective method,
stock-based compensation expense was recognized for awards
granted after the beginning of the fiscal year in which the
change is made, or January 1, 2003. Upon implementation of
SFAS No. 148 in 2003, the Company recognized
stock-based compensation expense for awards granted after
January 1, 2003.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 148, the Company
applied the intrinsic value-based provisions set forth in APB
Opinion No. 25. Under the intrinsic value method,
compensation expense is determined on the measurement date,
which is the first date when both the number of shares the
employee is entitled to receive, and the exercise price are
known. Compensation expense for each quarter resulting from
stock options granted by the Company was determined based upon
the difference between the exercise price and the fair market
value of the underlying common stock at the date of grant. The
Companys Stock Option Plan requires the exercise price of
the grants to be at the current fair market value of the
underlying common stock.
Upon adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1,
2006, the Company was required to recognize as an expense in the
financial statements all share-based payments to employees based
on their fair values. SFAS No. 123(R) requires
forfeitures to be estimated in calculating the expense relating
to the share-based payments, as opposed to recognizing any
forfeitures and the corresponding reduction in expense as they
occur. In addition, SFAS No. 123(R) requires any tax
savings resulting from tax deductions in excess of compensation
expense be reflected in the financial statements as a cash
inflow from financing activities, rather than as an operating
cash flow as in prior periods. The pro forma disclosures
previously permitted under SFAS 123, are no longer an
alternative to financial statement recognition. As indicated,
the Company adopted the requirements of SFAS 123(R) using
the modified prospective application transition method. The
prospective method requires compensation expense to be recorded
for all unvested stock options and restricted stock, based upon
the previously disclosed SFAS 123 methodology and amounts.
The Company, through its 1995 and 2002 Amended and Restated
Stock Option Plans (the Plans), may grant options to
key executives and other members of management of the Company
and its subsidiaries in amounts not to exceed
2,000,000 shares of the Companys common stock
allocated for each plan. The Plans are administered by the
Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board
of Directors. Option shares may be exercised subject to the
terms of the Plans and the terms prescribed by the Committee at
the time of grant. Currently, the Plans options have
either five or ten-year terms and are exercisable and vest in
equal increments over the option term. The Company has not
issued any new stock options to employees since 2003.
73
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Results for the years ended 2005 and 2004 have not been
restated. If compensation cost for stock option grants had been
determined based on a fair value method, net income and earnings
per share on a pro forma basis for 2005 and 2004, would have
been as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Net income, as reported
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
Add: Stock-based employee compensation expense included in
reported income, net of related tax effects
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense
determined under fair-value-based methods for all awards, net of
related tax effects
|
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income
|
|
$ |
17,829 |
|
|
$ |
13,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic as reported
|
|
$ |
0.62 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
Basic pro forma
|
|
$ |
0.62 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
Diluted as reported
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
Diluted pro forma
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
Compensation expense of $121,000 has been recorded for the year
ended December 31, 2006 under SFAS 123(R).
Compensation expense of $41,000 and $78,000 was recorded for the
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 under SFAS 148,
respectively.
Long Term Incentive Plan
In 2004, the Company approved the adoption of a Long Term
Incentive Plan (the LTIP). The LTIP provides
participants with the opportunity to earn cash and stock awards
based upon the achievement of specified financial goals over a
three-year performance period with the first performance period
commencing January 1, 2004. At the end of the three-year
performance period, and if the performance target is achieved,
the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors shall
determine the amount of LTIP awards that are payable to
participants in the LTIP. One-half of any LTIP award will be
payable in cash and one-half of the award will be payable in the
form of a stock award. If the Company achieves the three-year
performance target, payment of the cash portion of the award
would be made in three annual installments, with the first
payment being paid as of the end of the performance period and
the remaining two payments to be paid in the subsequent two
years. Any unpaid portion of a cash award is subject to
forfeiture if the participant voluntarily leaves the Company or
is discharged for cause. The portion of the award to be paid in
the form of stock will be issued as of the end of the
performance period. The number of shares of Companys
common stock subject to the stock award shall equal the dollar
amount of one-half of the LTIP award divided by the fair market
value of Companys common stock on the first date of the
performance period. The stock awards shall be made subject to
the terms and conditions of the LTIP and Plans. The Company
accrues awards based upon the criteria set-forth and approved by
the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, set forth
in the LTIP.
Deferred Compensation Plan
In 2006, the Company adopted an Executive Nonqualified Excess
Plan (the Excess Plan). The Excess Plan is intended
to be a nonqualified deferred compensation plan that will comply
with the provisions of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue
Code. The Company adopted the Excess Plan to provide a means by
which certain key management employees may elect to defer
receipt of current compensation from the Company in order to
provide retirement and other benefits, as provided for in the
Excess Plan. The Excess
74
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Plan is intended to be an unfunded plan maintained primarily for
the purpose of providing deferred compensation benefits for
eligible employees.
Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share are based on the weighted average
number of common shares outstanding during the year, while
diluted earnings per share includes the weighted average number
of common shares and potential dilution from shares issuable
pursuant to stock options using the treasury stock method.
Outstanding options of 112,959, 534,201, and 936,502 for the
periods ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004,
respectively, have been excluded from the diluted earnings per
share, as they were anti-dilutive. Shares issuable pursuant to
stock options included in diluted earnings per share were
126,660, 298,851, and 300,531 for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. Shares
related to the LTIP included in diluted earnings per share were
476,252 and 392,988 for the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. There were no shares related to the LTIP
included in diluted earnings per share for the year ended
December 31, 2004. In addition, shares issuable pursuant to
outstanding warrants included in diluted earnings per share were
71,908 for the year ended December 31, 2004. There were no
outstanding warrants as of December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income (loss) encompasses all changes in
shareholders equity (except those arising from
transactions with shareholders) and includes net income, net
unrealized capital gains or losses on available-for-sale
securities, and net deferred derivative gains or losses on
hedging activity.
Derivative Instruments
The Company entered into two interest rate swap transactions in
order to mitigate its interest rate risk. The Company accounts
for these transactions in accordance with SFAS No. 133
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, as subsequently amended. These interest
rate swap transactions have been designated as cash flow hedges
and are deemed highly effective hedges under
SFAS No. 133. Under SFAS No. 133, these
interest rate swap transactions are recorded at fair value on
the balance sheet and the effective portion of the changes in
fair value are accounted for within other comprehensive income.
Any portion of the hedge deemed to be ineffective is recognized
within the consolidated statements of income. The Company does
not use interest rate swaps for trading or other speculative
purposes.
In December 2005, the Company entered into a $6.0 million
convertible note receivable with an unaffiliated insurance
agency. The effective interest rate of the convertible note is
equal to the three-month LIBOR, plus 5.2% and is due
December 20, 2010. This note is convertible at the option
of the Company based upon a pre-determined formula, beginning in
2007. The conversion feature of this note is considered an
embedded derivative pursuant to SFAS No. 133, and
therefore is accounted for separately from the note. At
December 31, 2006, the estimated fair value of the
derivative was not material to the financial statements.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued SFAS No. 155,
Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial
Instruments. Under current generally accepted
accounting principles, an entity that holds a financial
instrument with an embedded derivative must bifurcate the
financial instrument, resulting in the host and the embedded
derivative being accounted for separately.
SFAS No. 155 permits, but does not require, entities
to account for financial instruments with an embedded derivative
at fair value thus negating the need to bifurcate the instrument
between its host and the embedded derivative.
SFAS No. 155 is effective for fiscal periods beginning
after September 15, 2006. The Company will evaluate
75
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the impact of SFAS No. 155, but believes the adoption
of SFAS No. 155 will not impact its consolidated
financial statements.
In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156,
Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets.
SFAS No. 156 amends FASB Statement No. 140,
Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial
Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, to require
that all separately recognized servicing assets and servicing
liabilities be initially measured at fair value, if practicable.
SFAS No. 156 permits, but does not require, the
subsequent measurement of separately recognized servicing assets
and servicing liabilities at fair value. An entity that uses
derivative instruments to mitigate the risks inherent in
servicing assets and servicing liabilities is required to
account for those derivative instruments at fair value.
SFAS No. 156 is effective for fiscal periods beginning
after September 15, 2006. The Company will evaluate the
impact of SFAS No. 156, but believes the adoption of
SFAS No. 156 will not impact its consolidated
financial statements.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109
(FIN 48), which becomes effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2006. FIN 48
clarifies the accounting and reporting for uncertain tax
positions. This interpretation prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement
recognition, measurement, and presentation of uncertain tax
positions taken or expected to be taken in an income tax return.
The Company has evaluated the impact of FIN 48 and has
determined it will not have a material impact on its
consolidated financial statements or disclosure requirements
upon adoption.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which becomes
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. The Company will evaluate the impact of
SFAS No. 157, but believes the adoption of
SFAS No. 157 will not have a material impact on its
consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158,
Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension
and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).
SFAS No. 158 requires the recognition, on a
prospective basis, of the funded status of a companys
defined benefit plan as an asset or liability. In addition, any
unrecognized gains and losses or prior service costs shall be
recognized as a component of accumulated other comprehensive
income. SFAS No. 158 will also require additional
disclosures in the notes to financial statements. In addition,
SFAS No. 158 requires companies to measure plan assets
and obligations as of the year-end balance sheet date.
SFAS No. 158 is effective for fiscal years ending
after December 15, 2006, with early application encouraged.
The measurement date provisions are effective for the fiscal
year ending December 31, 2008. The Company will evaluate
the impact of SFAS No. 158, but believes the adoption
of SFAS No. 158 will not impact its consolidated
financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115. SFAS No. 159 will
permit entities to measure many financial instruments and
certain other assets and liabilities at fair value on an
instrument-by-instrument basis. The objective of
SFAS No. 159 is to improve financial reporting and
reduce the volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring
related assets and liabilities differently.
SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. The Company will evaluate the
potential impact SFAS No. 159 will have on its
consolidated financial statements.
76
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The estimated fair value of investments in securities is
determined based on published market quotations and broker/
dealer quotations. The cost or amortized cost and estimated fair
value of investments in securities at December 31, 2006 and
2005 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Cost or | |
|
Gross | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
|
Amortized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
Cost | |
|
Gains | |
|
Losses | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities issued by the U.S. government and agencies
|
|
$ |
52,991 |
|
|
$ |
282 |
|
|
$ |
(521 |
) |
|
$ |
52,752 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
|
221,296 |
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
|
(1,460 |
) |
|
|
221,676 |
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
102,365 |
|
|
|
1,368 |
|
|
|
(1,515 |
) |
|
|
102,218 |
|
Mortgage and asset-backed securities
|
|
|
109,561 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
(1,626 |
) |
|
|
108,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt Securities available for sale
|
|
$ |
486,213 |
|
|
$ |
3,633 |
|
|
$ |
(5,122 |
) |
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Cost or | |
|
Gross | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
|
|
Amortized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
Cost | |
|
Gains | |
|
Losses | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities issued by the U.S. government and agencies
|
|
$ |
57,026 |
|
|
$ |
498 |
|
|
$ |
(720 |
) |
|
$ |
56,804 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
|
143,093 |
|
|
|
1,054 |
|
|
|
(1,493 |
) |
|
|
142,654 |
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
107,761 |
|
|
|
2,106 |
|
|
|
(1,722 |
) |
|
|
108,145 |
|
Mortgage and asset-backed securities
|
|
|
96,067 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(1,602 |
) |
|
|
94,592 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt Securities available for sale
|
|
$ |
403,947 |
|
|
$ |
3,785 |
|
|
$ |
(5,537 |
) |
|
$ |
402,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross unrealized appreciation and depreciation on available for
sale securities were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Unrealized appreciation
|
|
$ |
3,633 |
|
|
$ |
3,785 |
|
Unrealized depreciation
|
|
|
(5,122 |
) |
|
|
(5,537 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized depreciation
|
|
|
(1,489 |
) |
|
|
(1,752 |
) |
Deferred federal income tax benefit
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized depreciation on investments, net of deferred
federal income taxes
|
|
$ |
(968 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The gross realized gains and gross realized losses on the sale
of available for sale debt securities were $0 and $30,000,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2006. The
proceeds from the sale of debt securities were
$77.3 million.
The gross realized gains and gross realized losses on the sale
of available for sale debt securities were $47,000 and $142,000,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2005. The
gross realized gains and gross realized losses on the sale of
available for sale equity securities were $8,000 and $0,
respectively, for the year
77
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
ended December 31, 2005. The proceeds from the sale of debt
securities and equity securities were $95.1 million and
$8,000, respectively.
The gross realized gains and gross realized losses on the sale
of available for sale debt securities were $97,000 and $190,000,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
gross realized gains and gross realized losses on the sale of
available for sale equity securities were $429,000 and $0,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
proceeds from the sale of debt securities and equity securities
were $7.0 million and $2.4 million, respectively.
At December 31, 2006, the amortized cost and estimated fair
value of available for sale debt securities, by contractual
maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities may differ from
contractual maturities because certain borrowers may have the
right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or
prepayment penalties (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for Sale | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Amortized | |
|
Estimated | |
|
|
Cost | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Due in one year or less
|
|
$ |
36,777 |
|
|
$ |
36,714 |
|
Due after one year through five years
|
|
|
163,719 |
|
|
|
163,256 |
|
Due after five years through ten years
|
|
|
142,668 |
|
|
|
142,750 |
|
Due after ten years
|
|
|
33,488 |
|
|
|
33,926 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
109,561 |
|
|
|
108,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
486,213 |
|
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income for the three years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004 was as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net Investment Income Earned From:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities
|
|
$ |
19,376 |
|
|
$ |
16,080 |
|
|
$ |
13,559 |
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
3,279 |
|
|
|
2,291 |
|
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross investment income
|
|
|
22,655 |
|
|
|
18,408 |
|
|
|
15,365 |
|
Less investment expenses
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
$ |
22,075 |
|
|
$ |
17,975 |
|
|
$ |
14,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government obligations, municipal bonds, and bank
certificates of deposit aggregating $148.8 million and
$128.7 million were on deposit at December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively, with state regulatory authorities or
otherwise pledged as required by law or contract.
Other Than Temporary Impairments of Securities and Unrealized
Losses on Investments
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had 293 and 267,
securities that were in an unrealized loss position,
respectively. These investments each had unrealized losses of
less than ten percent of the amortized cost of the investment.
At December 31, 2006, 128 of those investments, with an
aggregate $127.3 million and $3.1 million fair value
and unrealized loss, respectively, have been in an unrealized
loss position for more than eighteen months. At
December 31, 2005, thirty-nine of those investments, with
an aggregate $29.9 million and $1.2 million fair value
and unrealized loss, respectively, have been in an unrealized
loss position for more than eighteen months. Positive evidence
considered in reaching the
78
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Companys conclusion that the investments in an unrealized
loss position are not other than temporarily impaired consisted
of: 1) there were no specific events which caused concerns;
2) there were no past due interest payments; 3) there
has been a rise in market prices; 4) the Companys
ability and intent to retain the investment for a sufficient
amount of time to allow an anticipated recovery in value; and
5) the Company also determined that the changes in market
value were considered normal in relation to overall fluctuations
in interest rates.
The fair value and amount of unrealized losses segregated by the
time period the investment has been in an unrealized loss
position were as follows for the years ended (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Less than 12 months | |
|
Greater than 12 months | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities issued by U.S. government and agencies
|
|
$ |
14,586 |
|
|
$ |
(61 |
) |
|
$ |
27,076 |
|
|
$ |
(460 |
) |
|
$ |
41,662 |
|
|
$ |
(521 |
) |
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
|
45,726 |
|
|
|
(210 |
) |
|
|
68,958 |
|
|
|
(1,250 |
) |
|
|
114,684 |
|
|
|
(1,460 |
) |
Corporate securities
|
|
|
7,646 |
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
55,520 |
|
|
|
(1,454 |
) |
|
|
63,166 |
|
|
|
(1,515 |
) |
Mortgage and asset backed securities
|
|
|
20,462 |
|
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
67,495 |
|
|
|
(1,535 |
) |
|
|
87,957 |
|
|
|
(1,626 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$ |
88,420 |
|
|
$ |
(423 |
) |
|
$ |
219,049 |
|
|
$ |
(4,699 |
) |
|
$ |
307,469 |
|
|
$ |
(5,122 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Less than 12 months | |
|
Greater than 12 months | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
Fair Value of | |
|
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
Investments | |
|
|
|
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
with | |
|
Gross | |
|
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
Losses | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities issued by U.S. government and agencies
|
|
$ |
10,627 |
|
|
$ |
(155 |
) |
|
$ |
24,328 |
|
|
$ |
(565 |
) |
|
$ |
34,955 |
|
|
$ |
(720 |
) |
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
|
64,559 |
|
|
|
(877 |
) |
|
|
24,818 |
|
|
|
(616 |
) |
|
|
89,377 |
|
|
|
(1,493 |
) |
Corporate securities
|
|
|
33,820 |
|
|
|
(769 |
) |
|
|
29,586 |
|
|
|
(953 |
) |
|
|
63,406 |
|
|
|
(1,722 |
) |
Mortgage and asset backed securities
|
|
|
58,048 |
|
|
|
(953 |
) |
|
|
20,667 |
|
|
|
(649 |
) |
|
|
78,715 |
|
|
|
(1,602 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$ |
167,053 |
|
|
$ |
(2,754 |
) |
|
$ |
99,399 |
|
|
$ |
(2,783 |
) |
|
$ |
266,452 |
|
|
$ |
(5,537 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Liability for Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses |
The Company regularly updates its reserve estimates as new
information becomes available and further events occur that may
impact the resolution of unsettled claims. Changes in prior
reserve estimates are
79
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
reflected in results of operations in the year such changes are
determined to be needed and recorded. Activity in the reserves
for losses and loss adjustment expenses is summarized as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance, beginning of year
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
$ |
378,157 |
|
|
$ |
339,465 |
|
Adjustment for deconsolidation of subsidiary(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,989 |
) |
Less reinsurance recoverables
|
|
|
187,254 |
|
|
|
151,161 |
|
|
|
147,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance, beginning of year
|
|
|
271,423 |
|
|
|
226,996 |
|
|
|
189,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incurred related to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year
|
|
|
149,012 |
|
|
|
146,658 |
|
|
|
131,409 |
|
|
Prior years
|
|
|
(2,719 |
) |
|
|
4,884 |
|
|
|
4,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total incurred
|
|
|
146,293 |
|
|
|
151,542 |
|
|
|
135,938 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid related to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year
|
|
|
31,790 |
|
|
|
28,059 |
|
|
|
26,534 |
|
|
Prior years
|
|
|
83,271 |
|
|
|
79,056 |
|
|
|
71,438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total paid
|
|
|
115,061 |
|
|
|
107,115 |
|
|
|
97,972 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance, end of year
|
|
|
302,655 |
|
|
|
271,423 |
|
|
|
226,996 |
|
|
Plus reinsurance recoverables
|
|
|
198,422 |
|
|
|
187,254 |
|
|
|
151,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
$ |
378,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
In accordance with FIN 46(R), the Company performed an
evaluation of its business relationships and determined that its
wholly owned subsidiary, American Indemnity, did not meet the
tests for consolidation, as neither the Company, nor its
subsidiary Star, are the primary beneficiaries of American
Indemnity. Therefore, effective January 1, 2004, the
Company deconsolidated American Indemnity on a prospective basis
in accordance with the provisions of FIN 46(R). The
adoption of FIN 46(R) and the deconsolidation of American
Indemnity did not have a material impact on the Companys
consolidated balance sheet or consolidated statement of income. |
As a result of favorable development on prior accident
years reserves, the provision for loss and loss adjustment
expenses (LAE) decreased by $2.7 million in
calendar year 2006. As a result of adverse development on prior
accident years reserves, the provision for loss and loss
adjustment expenses increased by $4.9 million and
$4.5 million, in calendar years 2005 and 2004, respectively.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company reported
net favorable development on loss and LAE of $2.7 million,
or 1.0% of net loss and LAE reserves. There were no significant
changes in the key assumptions utilized in the analysis and
calculations of the Companys reserves during 2006. The
$2.7 million of favorable development reflects favorable
development of $920,000, $1.8 million, and $848,000 related
to workers compensation programs, other lines of business,
and residual markets, respectively. The 2006 development also
reflects adverse development of $283,000 and $596,000 related to
commercial multiple peril and commercial auto programs,
respectively.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company reported
net adverse development on loss and LAE of $4.9 million, or
2.2% of net loss and LAE reserves. There were no significant
changes in the key assumptions utilized in the analysis and
calculations of the Companys reserves during 2005. The
$4.9 million of adverse development reflects
$1.6 million related to workers compensation
programs, $1.6 million related to other lines of business,
$1.1 million related to commercial auto programs, $392,000
related to commercial multiple peril and general liability
programs and $179,000 related to residual markets.
80
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company reported
net adverse development on loss and LAE of $4.5 million, or
2.4% of net loss and LAE reserves. There were no significant
changes in the key assumptions utilized in the analysis and
calculations of the Companys reserves during 2004. The
$4.5 million of adverse development reflects
$3.0 million related to commercial multiple peril and
general liability programs, $2.7 million related to
workers compensation programs, and $1.2 million
related to commercial auto programs. Partially offsetting this
adverse development was favorable development on residual
markets of $1.7 million, and other lines of business of
$670,000.
The Insurance Company Subsidiaries cede insurance to reinsurers
under pro-rata and
excess-of-loss
contracts. These reinsurance arrangements diversify the
Companys business and minimize its exposure to large
losses or from hazards of an unusual nature. The ceding of
insurance does not discharge the original insurer from its
primary liability to its policyholder. In the event that all or
any of the reinsuring companies are unable to meet their
obligations, the Insurance Company Subsidiaries would be liable
for such defaulted amounts. Therefore, the Company is subject to
credit risk with respect to the obligations of its reinsurers.
In order to minimize its exposure to significant losses from
reinsurer insolvencies, the Company evaluates the financial
condition of its reinsurers and monitors the economic
characteristics of the reinsurers on an ongoing basis. The
Company also assumes insurance from other domestic insurers and
reinsurers. Based upon managements evaluation, they have
concluded the reinsurance agreements entered into by the Company
transfer both significant timing and underwriting risk to the
reinsurer and, accordingly, are accounted for as reinsurance
under the provisions of SFAS No. 113
Accounting and Reporting for Reinsurance for
Short-Duration and Long-Duration Contracts.
Intercompany pooling agreements are commonly entered into
between affiliated insurance companies, so as to allow the
companies to utilize the capital and surplus of all of the
companies, rather than each individual company. Under pooling
arrangements, companies share in the insurance business that is
underwritten and allocate the combined premium, losses and
related expenses between the companies within the pooling
arrangement. The Insurance Company Subsidiaries utilize an
Inter-Company Reinsurance Agreement (the Pooling
Agreement). This Pooling Agreement includes Star,
Ameritrust Insurance Corporation (Ameritrust),
Savers Property and Casualty Insurance Company
(Savers) and Williamsburg National Insurance Company
(Williamsburg). Pursuant to the Pooling Agreement,
Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg have agreed to cede to Star
and Star has agreed to reinsure 100% of the liabilities and
expenses of Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg, relating to all
insurance and reinsurance policies issued by them. In return,
Star agrees to cede and Savers, Ameritrust and Williamsburg have
agreed to reinsure Star for their respective percentages of the
liabilities and expenses of Star. Annually, the Company examines
the Pooling Agreement for any changes to the ceded percentage
for the liabilities and expenses. Any changes to the Pooling
Agreement must be submitted to the applicable regulatory
authorities for approval.
The Company receives ceding commissions in conjunction with
reinsurance activities. These ceding commissions are offset
against the related underwriting expenses and were
$9.2 million, $13.5 million, and $12.1 million in
2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had reinsurance
recoverables for paid and unpaid losses of $202.7 million
and $202.6 million, respectively. The Company manages its
credit risk on reinsurance recoverables by reviewing the
financial stability, A.M. Best rating, capitalization, and
credit worthiness of prospective and existing risk-sharing
partners. The Company customarily collateralizes reinsurance
balances due from non-admitted reinsurers through funds withheld
trusts or stand-by letters of credit issued by highly rated
banks. The largest unsecured reinsurance recoverable is due from
an admitted reinsurer, which has an A rating from
A.M. Best and accounts for 40.8% of the total recoverable for
paid and unpaid losses.
81
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company has historically maintained an allowance for the
potential exposure to uncollectibility of certain reinsurance
balances. At the end of each quarter, an analysis of these
exposures is conducted to determine the potential exposure to
uncollectibility. The following table sets forth the
Companys exposure to uncollectible reinsurance and related
allowances for the years ending December 31, 2006 and 2005
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Gross Exposure
|
|
$ |
14,815 |
|
|
$ |
14,046 |
|
Collateral or other security
|
|
|
(3,623 |
) |
|
|
(2,749 |
) |
Allowance
|
|
|
(9,731 |
) |
|
|
(9,662 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Exposure
|
|
$ |
1,461 |
|
|
$ |
1,635 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company maintains an
excess-of-loss
reinsurance treaty designed to protect against large or unusual
loss and loss adjustment expense activity. The Company
determines the appropriate amount of reinsurance primarily based
on the Companys evaluation of the risks accepted, but also
considers analysis prepared by consultants and reinsurers and
market conditions, including the availability and pricing of
reinsurance. To date, there have been no material disputes with
the Companys
excess-of-loss
reinsurers. No assurance can be given, however, regarding the
future ability of any of the Companys
excess-of-loss
reinsurers to meet their obligations.
Under the workers compensation reinsurance treaty,
reinsurers are responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of
$350,000, up to $5.0 million for each claimant, on losses
occurring prior to April 1, 2005. The Company increased its
retention from $350,000 to $750,000, for losses occurring on or
after April 1, 2005 and to $1.0 million for losses
occurring on or after April 1, 2006. In addition, there is
coverage for loss events involving more than one claimant up to
$50.0 million per occurrence. In a loss event involving
more than one claimant, the per claimant coverage is
$10.0 million.
Under the core liability reinsurance treaty, the reinsurers are
responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of $350,000, up to
$2.0 million per occurrence on policies effective prior to
June 1, 2005. The Company increased its retention from
$350,000 to $500,000, for losses occurring on policies effective
on or after June 1, 2005. The Company also purchased an
additional $3.0 million of reinsurance clash coverage in
excess of the $2.0 million to cover amounts that may be in
excess of the $2.0 million policy limit, such as expenses
associated with the settlement of claims or awards in excess of
policy limits. Reinsurance clash coverage reinsures a loss when
two or more policies are involved in a common occurrence.
Effective June 1, 2006, the Company purchased a
$5.0 million excess cover to support its umbrella business.
This business had previously been reinsured through various
semi-automatic agreements and will now be protected by one
common treaty. The Company has no retention when the umbrella
limit is in excess of the primary limit, but does warrant it
will maintain a minimum liability of $1.0 million if the
primary limit does not respond or is exhausted.
The Company has a separate treaty to cover liability
specifically related to commercial trucking, where reinsurers
are responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of $350,000, up
to $1.0 million for losses occurring prior to
December 1, 2005. The Company increased its retention from
$350,000 to $500,000 for losses occurring on or after
December 1, 2005. In addition, the Company purchased an
additional $1.0 million of reinsurance clash coverage. The
Company established a separate treaty to cover liability related
to chemical distributors and repackagers, where reinsurers are
responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of $500,000, up to
$1.0 million, applied separately to general liability and
auto liability. This treaty was terminated on a run-off basis on
August 1, 2006. The exposures are covered under the core
casualty treaty for policies effective August 1, 2006 and
after. Additionally, the Company has a separate treaty structure
to cover liability related to agricultural business. The
reinsurer is responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of
$500,000, up to
82
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
$1.0 million for casualty losses and up to
$5.0 million, for property losses occurring on or after
May 1, 2006. This treaty also provides an additional
$1.0 million of reinsurance clash coverage for the casualty
lines.
Under the property reinsurance treaty, reinsurers are
responsible for 100% of the amount of each loss in excess of
$500,000, up to $5.0 million per location. In addition,
there is coverage for loss events involving multiple locations
up to $20.0 million after the Company has incurred $750,000
in loss.
Under the semi-automatic facultative reinsurance treaties,
covering the Companys umbrella policies, the reinsurers
are responsible for a minimum of 85% of the first million in
coverage and 100% of each of $2.0 million through
$5.0 million of coverage. The reinsurers pay a ceding
commission to reimburse the Company for its expenses associated
with the treaties.
On February 1, 2006, the Company renewed its existing
reinsurance agreement that provides reinsurance coverage for
policies written in the Companys public entity excess
liability program. The agreement provides reinsurance coverage
of $4.0 million in excess of $1.0 million for each
occurrence in excess of the policyholders self-insured
retention.
In addition, the Company purchased $10.0 million in excess
of $5.0 million for each occurrence, which is above the
underlying $5.0 million of coverage for the Companys
public entity excess liability program. Under this agreement,
reinsurers are responsible for 100% of each loss in excess of
$5.0 million for all lines, except workers
compensation, which is covered by the Companys core
catastrophic workers compensation treaty structure up to
$50.0 million per occurrence.
Additionally, several small programs have separate reinsurance
treaties in place, which limit the Companys exposure to
$350,000 or less.
Facultative reinsurance is purchased for property values in
excess of $5.0 million, casualty limits in excess of
$2.0 million or for coverage not covered by a treaty.
Reconciliations of direct to net premiums, on a written and
earned basis, for 2006, 2005, and 2004 are as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Written | |
|
Earned | |
|
Written | |
|
Earned | |
|
Written | |
|
Earned | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Direct
|
|
$ |
246,985 |
|
|
$ |
251,288 |
|
|
$ |
264,511 |
|
|
$ |
264,381 |
|
|
$ |
261,653 |
|
|
$ |
247,169 |
|
Assumed(1)
|
|
|
83,887 |
|
|
|
75,999 |
|
|
|
67,698 |
|
|
|
61,141 |
|
|
|
51,840 |
|
|
|
41,699 |
|
Ceded
|
|
|
(68,204 |
) |
|
|
(72,367 |
) |
|
|
(74,075 |
) |
|
|
(75,563 |
) |
|
|
(79,532 |
) |
|
|
(74,375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
$ |
262,668 |
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
258,134 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
233,961 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One reinsurer, with a financial strength rating of A
(Excellent) rated by A.M. Best, accounts for 12.7% of ceded
premiums in 2006.
|
|
(1) |
For the years ending December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004,
$72.6 million, $56.0 million, and $38.2 million,
relates to assumed business the Company manages directly,
respectively. The related transactions of this business are
processed through the Companys internal systems and
related controls. In addition, the Company does not assume any
foreign reinsurance. |
The Company defines its operations as specialty risk management
operations and agency operations based upon differences in
products and services. The separate financial information of
these segments is consistent with the way results are regularly
evaluated by management in deciding how to allocate resources
and in assessing performance. Intersegment revenue is eliminated
upon consolidation. It would be impracticable for the Company to
determine the allocation of assets between the two segments.
83
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Specialty Risk Management Operations
The specialty risk management operations segment focuses on
specialty or niche insurance business in which it provides
various services and coverages tailored to meet specific
requirements of defined client groups and their members. These
services include risk management consulting, claims
administration and handling, loss control and prevention, and
reinsurance placement, along with various types of property and
casualty insurance coverage, including workers
compensation, commercial multiple peril, general liability,
commercial auto liability, and inland marine. Insurance coverage
is provided primarily to associations or similar groups of
members and to specified classes of business of the
Companys agent-partners. The Company recognizes revenue
related to the services and coverages the specialty risk
management operations provides within seven categories: net
earned premiums, management fees, claims fees, loss control
fees, reinsurance placement, investment income, and net realized
gains (losses).
Agency Operations
The Company earns commissions through the operation of its
retail property and casualty insurance agencies located in
Michigan, California, and Florida. The agency operations produce
commercial, personal lines, life, and accident and health
insurance, for more than fifty unaffiliated insurance carriers.
The agency produces an immaterial amount of business for its
affiliated Insurance Company Subsidiaries.
The following table sets forth the segment results (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earned premiums
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
18,714 |
|
|
|
16,741 |
|
|
|
16,253 |
|
|
Claims fees(2)
|
|
|
8,776 |
|
|
|
7,113 |
|
|
|
13,207 |
|
|
Loss control fees
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2,174 |
|
|
Reinsurance placement
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
Investment income
|
|
|
21,115 |
|
|
|
17,692 |
|
|
|
14,887 |
|
|
Net realized gains
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty risk management
|
|
|
306,545 |
|
|
|
294,510 |
|
|
|
261,773 |
|
|
Agency operations
|
|
|
12,285 |
|
|
|
11,304 |
|
|
|
9,805 |
|
|
Miscellaneous income(3)
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Intersegment revenue
|
|
|
(1,554 |
) |
|
|
(2,162 |
) |
|
|
(1,324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated revenue
|
|
$ |
318,236 |
|
|
$ |
304,017 |
|
|
$ |
270,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty risk management
|
|
$ |
37,950 |
|
|
$ |
29,444 |
|
|
$ |
23,205 |
|
|
Agency operations(1)
|
|
|
2,951 |
|
|
|
3,343 |
|
|
|
2,257 |
|
|
Non-allocated expenses
|
|
|
(9,396 |
) |
|
|
(7,121 |
) |
|
|
(5,088 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated pre-tax income
|
|
$ |
31,505 |
|
|
$ |
25,666 |
|
|
$ |
20,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The Companys agency operations include an allocation of
corporate overhead, which includes expenses associated with
accounting, information services, legal, and other corporate
services. The corporate overhead allocation excludes those
expenses specific to the holding company. For the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, the allocation of
corporate overhead to the agency operations segment was
$2.9 million, $3.1 million, and $3.5 million,
respectively. |
84
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
(2) |
During 2004, the Company accelerated the recognition of
$3.5 million in deferred claim revenue, as a result of an
earlier than anticipated termination of two limited duration
administrative services and multi-state claims run-off
contracts. These contracts had been terminated by the liquidator
for the companies during the third quarter of 2004. Had the
contract not been terminated, the Company would have received
additional claims fee revenue for continued claims handling
services. |
|
(3) |
The miscellaneous income included in the revenue relates to
miscellaneous interest income within the holding company. |
The following table sets forth the non-allocated expenses
included in pre-tax income (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Holding company expenses
|
|
$ |
(2,830 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,892 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,431 |
) |
Amortization
|
|
|
(590 |
) |
|
|
(373 |
) |
|
|
(376 |
) |
Interest expense
|
|
|
(5,976 |
) |
|
|
(3,856 |
) |
|
|
(2,281 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(9,396 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,121 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,088 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lines of Credit
In November 2004, the Company entered into a revolving line of
credit for up to $25.0 million, which expires in November
2007. The Company plans to renew the line of credit upon its
expiration and will be evaluating the renewal terms based upon
the Companys overall capital strategy. The Company uses
the revolving line of credit to meet short-term working capital
needs. Under the revolving line of credit, the Company and
certain of its non-regulated subsidiaries pledged security
interests in certain property and assets of the Company and
named subsidiaries.
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had an
outstanding balance of $7.0 million and $5.0 million,
respectively, on the revolving line of credit.
The revolving line of credit provides for interest at a variable
rate based, at the Companys option, upon either a prime
based rate or LIBOR based rate. In addition, the revolving line
of credit also provides for an unused facility fee. On prime
based borrowings, the applicable margin ranges from 75 to
25 basis points below prime. On LIBOR based borrowings, the
applicable margin ranges from 125 to 175 basis points above
LIBOR. The margin for all loans is dependent on the sum of
non-regulated earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation,
amortization, and non-cash impairment charges related to
intangible assets for the preceding four quarters, plus
dividends paid or payable to the Company from subsidiaries
during such period (Adjusted EBITDA). At
December 31, 2006, the weighted average interest rate for
LIBOR based borrowings outstanding was 6.7%.
Debt covenants consist of: (1) maintenance of the ratio of
Adjusted EBITDA to interest expense of 2.0 to 1.0,
(2) minimum net worth of $130.0 million and increasing
annually commencing June 30, 2005, by fifty percent of the
prior years positive net income, (3) minimum A.M.
Best rating of B, and (4) minimum Risk Based
Capital Ratio for Star of 1.75 to 1.00. As of December 31,
2006, the Company was in compliance with these covenants.
Previously, a non-insurance premium finance subsidiary of the
Company maintained a line of credit with a bank. At
December 31, 2005, this line of credit had an outstanding
balance of $2.0 million. In May 2006, the balance of this
loan was paid in full by the subsidiary and the terms of the
line of credit were not renewed.
85
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Senior Debentures
In April 2004, the Company issued senior debentures in the
amount of $13.0 million. The senior debentures mature in
thirty years and provide for interest at the three-month LIBOR,
plus 4.0%, which is non-deferrable. At December 31, 2006,
the interest rate was 9.37%. The senior debentures are callable
by the Company at par after five years from the date of
issuance. Associated with this transaction, the Company incurred
$390,000 of commissions paid to the placement agents. These
issuance costs have been capitalized and are included in other
assets on the balance sheet, which are being amortized over
seven years as a component of interest expense.
In May 2004, the Company issued senior debentures in the amount
of $12.0 million. The senior debentures mature in thirty
years and provide for interest at the three-month LIBOR, plus
4.2%, which is non-deferrable. At December 31, 2006, the
interest rate was 9.57%. The senior debentures are callable by
the Company at par after five years from the date of issuance.
Associated with this transaction, the Company incurred $360,000
of commissions paid to the placement agents. These issuance
costs have been capitalized and are included in other assets on
the balance sheet, which are being amortized over seven years as
a component of interest expense.
The Company contributed $9.9 million of the proceeds to its
Insurance Company Subsidiaries in December 2004. The remaining
proceeds from the issuance of the senior debentures were used
for general corporate purposes.
Junior Subordinated Debentures
In September 2005, Meadowbrook Capital Trust II (the
Trust II), an unconsolidated subsidiary trust
of the Company, issued $20.0 million of mandatorily
redeemable trust preferred securities (TPS) to a
trust formed by an institutional investor. Contemporaneously,
the Company issued $20.6 million in junior subordinated
debentures, which includes the Companys investment in the
trust of $620,000. These debentures have financial terms similar
to those of the TPS, which includes the deferral of interest
payments at any time, or from
time-to-time, for a
period not exceeding five years, provided there is no event of
default. These debentures mature in thirty years and provide for
interest at the three-month LIBOR, plus 3.58%. At
December 31, 2006, the interest rate was 8.94%. These
debentures are callable by the Company at par beginning in
October 2010.
The Company received $19.4 million in net proceeds, after
the deduction of approximately $600,000 of commissions paid to
the placement agents in the transaction. These issuance costs
have been capitalized and are included in other assets on the
balance sheet, which will be amortized over seven years as a
component of interest expense.
The Company contributed $10.0 million of the proceeds from
the issuance of these debentures to its Insurance Company
Subsidiaries and the remaining balance has been used for general
corporate purposes.
In September 2003, Meadowbrook Capital Trust (the
Trust), an unconsolidated subsidiary trust of the
Company, issued $10.0 million of mandatorily redeemable TPS
to a trust formed by an institutional investor.
Contemporaneously, the Company issued $10.3 million in
junior subordinated debentures, which includes the
Companys investment in the trust of $310,000. These
debentures have financial terms similar to those of the TPS,
which includes the deferral of interest payments at any time, or
from time-to-time, for
a period not exceeding five years, provided there is no event of
default. These debentures mature in thirty years and provide for
interest at the three-month LIBOR, plus 4.05%. At
December 31, 2006, the interest rate was 9.42%. These
debentures are callable by the Company at par beginning in
October 2008.
The Company received $9.7 million in net proceeds, after
the deduction of approximately $300,000 of commissions paid to
the placement agents in the transaction. These issuance costs
have been capitalized and
86
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
are included in other assets on the balance sheet, which are
being amortized over seven years as a component of interest
expense.
The Company contributed $6.3 million of the proceeds from
the issuance of these debentures to its Insurance Company
Subsidiaries and the remaining balance has been used for general
corporate purposes.
The junior subordinated debentures are unsecured obligations of
the Company and are junior to the right of payment to all senior
indebtedness of the Company. The Company has guaranteed that the
payments made to both Trusts will be distributed by the Trusts
to the holders of the TPS.
The Company estimates that the fair value of the above mentioned
junior subordinated debentures and senior debentures issued
approximate the gross proceeds of cash received at the time of
issuance.
The seven year amortization period in regard to the issuance
costs represents managements best estimate of the
estimated useful life of the bonds related to both the senior
debentures and junior subordinated debentures described above.
|
|
7. |
Derivative Instruments |
In October 2005, the Company entered into two interest rate swap
transactions to mitigate its interest rate risk on
$5.0 million and $20.0 million of the Companys
senior debentures and trust preferred securities, respectively.
The Company accrues for these transactions in accordance with
SFAS No. 133 Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, as subsequently
amended. These interest rate swap transactions have been
designated as cash flow hedges and are deemed highly effective
hedges under SFAS No. 133. In accordance with
SFAS No. 133, these interest rate swap transactions
are recorded at fair value on the balance sheet and the
effective portion of the changes in fair value are accounted for
within other comprehensive income. The interest differential to
be paid or received is being accrued and is being recognized as
an adjustment to interest expense.
The first interest rate swap transaction, which relates to
$5.0 million of the Companys $12.0 million
issuance of senior debentures, has an effective date of
October 6, 2005 and ending date of May 24, 2009. The
Company is required to make certain quarterly fixed rate
payments calculated on a notional amount of $5.0 million,
non-amortizing, based on a fixed annual interest rate of 8.925%.
The counterparty is obligated to make quarterly floating rate
payments to the Company, referencing the same notional amount,
based on the three-month LIBOR, plus 4.20%.
The second interest rate swap transaction, which relates to
$20.0 million of the Companys $20.0 million
issuance of trust preferred securities, has an effective date of
October 6, 2005 and ending date of September 16, 2010.
The Company is required to make quarterly fixed rate payments
calculated on a notional amount of $20.0 million,
non-amortizing, based on a fixed annual interest rate of 8.34%.
The counterparty is obligated to make quarterly floating rate
payments to the Company, referencing the same notional amount,
based on the three-month LIBOR, plus 3.58%.
In relation to the above interest rate swaps, the net interest
income received for the year ended December 31, 2006, was
approximately $67,000. The net interest expense incurred for the
year ended December 31, 2005, was approximately $4,000. The
total fair value of the interest rate swaps as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was approximately $200,000 and
$14,000, respectively. Accumulated other comprehensive income at
December 31, 2006 and 2005, included accumulated income on
the cash flow hedge, net of taxes, of approximately $130,000 and
$9,000, respectively.
In July 2005, the Company made a $2.5 million loan, at an
effective interest rate equal to the three-month LIBOR, plus
5.2%, to an unaffiliated insurance agency. In December 2005, the
Company loaned an additional $3.5 million to the
unaffiliated insurance agency. The original $2.5 million
demand note was replaced with a $6.0 million convertible
note. The effective interest rate of the convertible note is
equal to the
87
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
three-month LIBOR, plus 5.2% and is due December 20, 2010.
This agency has been a producer for the Company for over ten
years. As security for the loan, the borrower granted the
Company a security interest in its accounts, cash, general
intangibles, and other intangible property. Also, the
shareholder then pledged 100% of the common shares of three
insurance agencies, the common shares owned by the shareholder
in another agency, and has executed a personal guaranty. This
note is convertible at the option of the Company based upon a
pre-determined formula, beginning in 2007. The conversion
feature of this note is considered an embedded derivative
pursuant to SFAS No. 133, and therefore is accounted
for separately from the note. At December 31, 2006, the
estimated fair value of the derivative is not material to the
financial statements.
|
|
8. |
Regulatory Matters and Rating Issues |
A significant portion of the Companys consolidated assets
represent assets of its Insurance Company Subsidiaries. The
State of Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Services
(OFIS) restricts the amount of funds that may be
transferred to the Company in the form of dividends, loans or
advances. These restrictions in general, are as follows: the
maximum discretionary dividend that may be declared, based on
data from the preceding calendar year, is the greater of each
insurance companys net income (excluding realized capital
gains) or ten percent of the insurance companys surplus
(excluding unrealized gains). These dividends are further
limited by a clause in the Michigan law that prohibits an
insurer from declaring dividends except out of surplus earnings
of the company. Earned surplus balances are calculated on a
quarterly basis. Since Star is the parent insurance company, its
maximum dividend calculation represents the combined Insurance
Company Subsidiaries surplus. At December 31, 2006,
Stars earned surplus position was positive
$13.2 million. At December 31, 2005, Star had negative
earned surplus of $7.2 million. Based upon the 2006
statutory financial statements, Star may pay a dividend of up to
$13.2 million without the prior approval of OFIS. No
statutory dividends were paid in 2006 or 2005.
Summarized 2006 and 2005 statutory basis information for the
primary insurance subsidiaries, which differs from generally
accepted accounting principles, is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Star | |
|
Savers | |
|
Williamsburg | |
|
Ameritrust | |
|
Star | |
|
Savers | |
|
Williamsburg | |
|
Ameritrust | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Statutory capital and surplus
|
|
$ |
165,107 |
|
|
$ |
35,914 |
|
|
$ |
18,979 |
|
|
$ |
16,463 |
|
|
$ |
141,136 |
|
|
$ |
31,883 |
|
|
$ |
16,447 |
|
|
$ |
14,398 |
|
RBC authorized control level
|
|
|
31,569 |
|
|
|
5,710 |
|
|
|
2,960 |
|
|
|
2,532 |
|
|
|
37,265 |
|
|
|
7,673 |
|
|
|
4,043 |
|
|
|
3,345 |
|
Statutory net income (loss)
|
|
|
9,517 |
|
|
|
4,135 |
|
|
|
1,969 |
|
|
|
2,311 |
|
|
|
13,446 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
(518 |
) |
|
|
539 |
|
Insurance operations are subject to various leverage tests (e.g.
premium to statutory surplus ratios), which are evaluated by
regulators and rating agencies. The Companys targets for
gross and net written premium to statutory surplus are 2.8 to
1.0 and 2.25 to 1.0, respectively. As of December 31, 2006,
on a statutory combined basis, the gross and net premium
leverage ratios were 2.0 to 1.0 and 1.6 to 1.0, respectively.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) has adopted a risk-based capital
(RBC) formula to be applied to all property and
casualty insurance companies. The formula measures required
capital and surplus based on an insurance companys
products and investment portfolio and is used as a tool to
evaluate the capital of regulated companies. The RBC formula is
used by state insurance regulators to monitor trends in
statutory capital and surplus for the purpose of initiating
regulatory action. In general, an insurance company must submit
a calculation of its RBC formula to the insurance department of
its state of domicile as of the end of the previous calendar
year. These laws require increasing degrees of regulatory
oversight and intervention as an insurance companys RBC
declines. The level of regulatory oversight ranges from
requiring the insurance company to inform and obtain approval
from the domiciliary insurance
88
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
commissioner of a comprehensive financial plan for increasing
its RBC to mandatory regulatory intervention requiring an
insurance company to be placed under regulatory control in a
rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding.
The RBC Model Act provides for four different levels of
regulatory attention depending on the ratio of the
companys total adjusted capital, defined as the total of
its statutory capital, surplus and asset valuation reserve, to
its risk-based capital.
At December 31, 2006, all of the Insurance Company
Subsidiaries were in compliance with RBC requirements. Star
reported statutory surplus of $165.1 million and
$141.1 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. The calculated RBC was $31.6 million in 2006 and
$37.3 million in 2005. The threshold requiring the minimum
regulatory involvement was $63.1 million in 2006 and
$74.5 million in 2005.
|
|
9. |
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs |
The following table reflects the amounts of policy acquisition
costs deferred and amortized (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$ |
26,371 |
|
|
$ |
25,167 |
|
|
$ |
19,564 |
|
Acquisition costs deferred
|
|
|
39,201 |
|
|
|
35,367 |
|
|
|
30,883 |
|
Amortized to expense during the period
|
|
|
(37,670 |
) |
|
|
(34,163 |
) |
|
|
(25,280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$ |
27,902 |
|
|
$ |
26,371 |
|
|
$ |
25,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company reduces deferred policy acquisition costs for
premium deficiencies. There were no premium deficiencies at
December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004.
The provision for income taxes consists of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Current tax expense
|
|
$ |
8,858 |
|
|
$ |
6,410 |
|
|
$ |
4,775 |
|
Deferred tax expense
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
1,347 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for income tax expense
|
|
$ |
9,599 |
|
|
$ |
7,757 |
|
|
$ |
6,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of the Companys tax provision on income
from operations to the U.S. federal income tax rate of 35%
in 2006 and 2005, and 34% in 2004 is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Tax provision at statutory rate
|
|
$ |
11,027 |
|
|
$ |
8,982 |
|
|
$ |
6,927 |
|
Tax effect of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax exempt interest
|
|
|
(2,021 |
) |
|
|
(1,291 |
) |
|
|
(777 |
) |
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
Impact of increase in statutory rate relating to deferred tax
assets at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(386 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal income tax expense
|
|
$ |
9,599 |
|
|
$ |
7,757 |
|
|
$ |
6,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax expense rate
|
|
|
30.5 |
% |
|
|
30.2 |
% |
|
|
31.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current statutory tax rate of 35% is based upon
$31.0 million and $25.0 million of taxable income for
2006 and 2005, respectively. The 2004 statutory tax rate of 34%
is based upon $6.8 million of taxable income after the
utilization of $13.1 million of net operating loss
carryforwards. At $18.3 million of taxable income, the
statutory tax rate increased to 35%. At December 31, 2006
and 2005, the current taxes receivable (payable) were
$1.6 million and ($268,000), respectively.
Deferred federal income taxes, under SFAS No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes, reflect the
estimated future tax effect of temporary differences between the
bases of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes
and such amounts as measured by tax laws and regulations.
The components of deferred tax assets and liabilities as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Deferred | |
|
Deferred | |
|
Deferred | |
|
Deferred | |
|
|
Tax | |
|
Tax | |
|
Tax | |
|
Tax | |
|
|
Assets | |
|
Liabilities | |
|
Assets | |
|
Liabilities | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
$ |
14,557 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
14,125 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Unearned premium reserves
|
|
|
8,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss/ gains on investments
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,230 |
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholder dividends
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
|
Alternate minimum tax credit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
637 |
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,529 |
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
Long term incentive plan
|
|
|
1,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred gain on sale-leaseback transaction
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
495 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred taxes
|
|
|
27,397 |
|
|
|
11,665 |
|
|
|
27,389 |
|
|
|
10,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
15,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
16,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Realization of the deferred tax asset is dependent on generating
sufficient taxable income to absorb the applicable reversing
temporary differences. Refer to Note 1
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.
|
|
11. |
Stock Options, Long Term Incentive Plan, and Deferred
Compensation Plan |
The Company has two plans under which it has issued stock
options, its 1995 and 2002 Amended and Restated Stock Option
Plans (the Plans). Currently the Plans options
have either five or ten-year terms and are exercisable and vest
in equal increments over the option term. The Company has not
issued any new stock options to employees since 2003.
The following is a summary of the Companys stock option
activity and related information for the years ended
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Price | |
|
Options | |
|
Price | |
|
Options | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding beginning of year
|
|
|
1,605,901 |
|
|
$ |
5.42 |
|
|
|
2,121,317 |
|
|
$ |
5.53 |
|
|
|
2,381,609 |
|
|
$ |
5.80 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(791,038 |
) |
|
$ |
3.32 |
|
|
|
(97,825 |
) |
|
$ |
2.90 |
|
|
|
(39,500 |
) |
|
$ |
2.74 |
|
Expired and/or forfeited
|
|
|
(423,185 |
) |
|
$ |
7.54 |
|
|
|
(417,591 |
) |
|
$ |
6.57 |
|
|
|
(220,792 |
) |
|
$ |
8.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding end of year
|
|
|
391,678 |
|
|
$ |
7.38 |
|
|
|
1,605,901 |
|
|
$ |
5.42 |
|
|
|
2,121,317 |
|
|
$ |
5.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at end of year
|
|
|
324,704 |
|
|
$ |
7.62 |
|
|
|
1,288,296 |
|
|
$ |
5.65 |
|
|
|
1,451,015 |
|
|
$ |
5.92 |
|
The following table summarizes information about stock options
outstanding at December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding |
|
Options Exercisable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
Range of |
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
Exercise |
|
|
|
Exercise |
Exercise Prices |
|
Options |
|
Life (Years) |
|
Price |
|
Options |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$2.173 to $3.066
|
|
|
267,219 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
2.56 |
|
|
|
219,107 |
|
|
$ |
2.64 |
|
$3.507
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
$ |
3.51 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.51 |
|
$6.48
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
$ |
6.48 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
6.48 |
|
$10.91 to $30.45
|
|
|
112,959 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
$ |
19.14 |
|
|
|
95,597 |
|
|
$ |
19.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
391,678 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
$ |
7.38 |
|
|
|
324,704 |
|
|
$ |
7.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2004, the Company approved the adoption of a Long Term
Incentive Plan (the LTIP). The LTIP provides
participants with the opportunity to earn cash and stock awards
based upon the achievement of specified financial goals over a
three-year performance period with the first performance period
commencing January 1, 2004. At the end of the three-year
performance period, and if the performance target is achieved,
the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors shall
determine the amount of LTIP awards that are payable to
participants in the LTIP. One-half of any LTIP award will be
payable in cash and one-half of the award will be payable in the
form of a stock award. If the Company achieves the three-year
performance target, payment of the cash portion of the award
would be made in three annual installments, with the first
payment being paid as of the end of the performance period and
the remaining two payments to be paid in the subsequent two
years. Any unpaid portion of a cash award is subject to
forfeiture if the participant voluntarily leaves the Company or
is discharged for cause. The portion of the award to be paid in
the form of stock will be issued as of the end of the
performance period. The number of shares of Companys
common stock subject to the stock award shall equal the dollar
amount of one-half of the LTIP award divided by the fair market
value of Companys common stock on the first date of the
performance period. The stock awards
91
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
shall be made subject to the terms and conditions of the LTIP
and Plans. The Company accrues awards based upon the criteria
set-forth and approved by the Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors, set forth in the LTIP. At December 31,
2006, the Company had $1.4 million and $2.5 million
accrued for the cash and stock award, respectively, for a total
accrual of $3.9 million under the LTIP. At
December 31, 2005, the Company had $894,000 and
$1.6 million accrued for the cash and stock award,
respectively, for a total accrual of $2.5 million under the
LTIP. Accordingly, the Company included 476,252 and 392,988 in
diluted earnings per share for the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively.
In 2006, the Company adopted an Executive Nonqualified Excess
Plan (the Excess Plan). The Excess Plan is intended
to be a nonqualified deferred compensation plan that will comply
with the provisions of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue
Code. The Company adopted the Excess Plan to provide a means by
which certain key management employees may elect to defer
receipt of current compensation from the Company in order to
provide retirement and other benefits, as provided for in the
Excess Plan. The Excess Plan is intended to be an unfunded plan
maintained primarily for the purpose of providing deferred
compensation benefits for eligible employees. At
December 31, 2006, the Company had $211,000 accrued for
deferred compensation.
At December 31, 2006, shareholders equity was
$201.7 million, or a book value of $6.93 per common
share, compared to $177.4 million, or a book value of
$6.19 per common share at December 31, 2005.
In October 2005, the Companys Board of Directors
authorized management to purchase up to 1,000,000 shares of
its common stock in market transactions for a period not to
exceed twenty-four months. For the year ended December 31,
2006, the Company did not repurchase any common stock. For the
year ended December 31, 2005, the Company purchased and
retired 772,900 shares of common stock for a total cost of
approximately $4.2 million. Of these shares,
63,000 shares for a total cost of approximately $372,000
related to the current share repurchase plan. As of
December 31, 2006, the cumulative amount the Company
repurchased and retired under the current share repurchase plan
was 63,000 shares of common stock for a total cost of
approximately $372,000. As of December 31, 2006, the
Company has available up to 937,000 shares remaining to be
purchased.
The Companys Board of Directors did not declare a dividend
in 2006 or 2005. When evaluating the declaration of a dividend,
the Board of Directors considers a variety of factors, including
but not limited to, the Companys cash flow, liquidity
needs, results of operations and its overall financial
condition. As a holding company, the ability to pay cash
dividends is partially dependent on dividends and other
permitted payments from its subsidiaries. The Company did not
receive any dividends from its regulated insurance subsidiaries
in 2006 and 2005. Refer to Note 8 Regulatory
Matters and Rating Issues for additional information
regarding dividend restrictions.
|
|
13. |
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets |
The Company evaluates existing goodwill for impairment on an
annual basis as of October 1st, or more frequently if
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the asset might
be impaired. The Company carries goodwill on two reporting units
within the agency operations segment in the amount of
$6.5 million and three reporting units within the specialty
risk management operations segment in the amount of
$25.0 million.
In 2006, the Company recorded additional goodwill of $700,000,
related to the 2005 acquisition of a Florida-based agency.
During 2006, 2005, and 2004, the Company did not record any
impairment losses in relation to its existing goodwill.
92
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following sets forth the carrying amount of goodwill by
business segment (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty Risk | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management | |
|
|
|
|
Agency Operations | |
|
Operations | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
$ |
6,469 |
|
|
$ |
25,033 |
|
|
$ |
31,502 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
$ |
5,769 |
|
|
$ |
25,033 |
|
|
$ |
30,802 |
|
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had other
intangible assets, net of related accumulated amortization, of
$1.8 million and $2.4 million, respectively, recorded
on the consolidated balance sheet as part of Other
Assets.
During the fourth quarter 2005, the Company acquired a Florida
based agency and its related book of business. The total
purchase price of this acquisition was $3.5 million,
consisting of $1.7 million recognized as an other
intangible asset. The remaining $1.8 million relates to
goodwill, as indicated above. There was an immaterial amount of
tangible assets related to this acquisition. The Company is
amortizing $1.2 million of the other intangible asset
related to the purchase over a five year period. The remaining
$500,000 of the other intangible asset has an indefinite life
and is evaluated annually in accordance with
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the gross carrying amount of
other intangible assets was $3.3 million and the
accumulated amortization was $1.5 million and $942,000,
respectively. Amortization expense related to other intangible
assets for 2006, 2005, and 2004, was $590,000, $373,000, and
$376,000, respectively.
Amortization expense for the five succeeding years is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$ |
563 |
|
2008
|
|
|
265 |
|
2009
|
|
|
257 |
|
2010
|
|
|
213 |
|
2011
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total amortization expense
|
|
$ |
1,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
The Company has certain operating lease agreements for its
offices and equipment. A majority of the Companys lease
agreements contain renewal options and rent escalation clauses.
At December 31, 2006, future minimum rental payments
required under non-cancelable long-term operating leases are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$ |
2,749 |
|
2008
|
|
|
2,512 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2,245 |
|
2010
|
|
|
1,868 |
|
2011
|
|
|
1,606 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
3,089 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease commitments
|
|
$ |
14,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
93
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005,
and 2004, amounted to $2.4 million, $2.2 million, and
$3.3 million, respectively.
Most states require admitted property and casualty insurers to
become members of insolvency funds or associations, which
generally protect policyholders against the insolvency of such
insurers. Members of the fund or association must contribute to
the payment of certain claims made against insolvent insurers.
Maximum contributions required by law in any one year vary
between 1% and 2% of annual premium written by a member in that
state. Assessments from insolvency funds were $288,000,
$664,000, and $784,000, respectively, for 2006, 2005, and 2004.
Most of these payments are recoverable through future policy
surcharges and premium tax reductions.
The Companys Insurance Company Subsidiaries are also
required to participate in various mandatory insurance
facilities or in funding mandatory pools, which are generally
designed to provide insurance coverage for consumers who are
unable to obtain insurance in the voluntary insurance market.
Among the pools participated in are those established in certain
states to provide windstorm and other similar types of property
coverage. These pools typically require all companies writing
applicable lines of insurance in the state for which the pool
has been established to fund deficiencies experienced by the
pool based upon each companys relative premium writings in
that state, with any excess funding typically distributed to the
participating companies on the same basis. To the extent that
reinsurance treaties do not cover these assessments, they may
have an adverse effect on the Company. Total assessments paid to
all such facilities were $2.9 million, $3.0 million,
and $2.3 million, respectively, for 2006, 2005, and 2004.
The Company, and its subsidiaries, are subject at times to
various claims, lawsuits and proceedings relating principally to
alleged errors or omissions in the placement of insurance,
claims administration, consulting services and other business
transactions arising in the ordinary course of business. Where
appropriate, the Company vigorously defends such claims,
lawsuits and proceedings. Some of these claims, lawsuits and
proceedings seek damages, including consequential, exemplary or
punitive damages, in amounts that could, if awarded, be
significant. Most of the claims, lawsuits and proceedings
arising in the ordinary course of business are covered by errors
and omissions insurance or other appropriate insurance. In terms
of deductibles associated with such insurance, the Company has
established provisions against these items, which are believed
to be adequate in light of current information and legal advice.
In accordance with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, if it is probable that an asset has
been impaired or a liability has been incurred as of the date of
the financial statements and the amount of loss is estimable; an
accrual for the costs to resolve these claims is recorded by the
Company in its consolidated balance sheets. Period expenses
related to the defense of such claims are included in other
operating expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements
of income. Management, with the assistance of outside counsel,
adjusts such provisions according to new developments or changes
in the strategy in dealing with such matters. On the basis of
current information, the Company does not expect the outcome of
the claims, lawsuits and proceedings to which the Company is
subject to, either individually, or in the aggregate, will have
a material adverse effect on the Companys financial
condition. However, it is possible that future results of
operations or cash flows for any particular quarter or annual
period could be materially affected by an unfavorable resolution
of any such matters.
|
|
15. |
Sale-Leaseback Transaction |
In 2004, the Company entered into an agreement with an
unaffiliated third party to sell its property in Cerritos,
California, owned by Savers and subsequently leaseback the
property to Meadowbrook, Inc. There were no future commitments,
obligations, provisions, or circumstances included in either the
sale contract or the lease contract that would result in the
Companys continuing involvement; therefore, the assets
associated with the property were removed from the
Companys consolidated balance sheets.
94
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The sale proceeds were $2.9 million and the net book value
of the property was $1.9 million. Direct costs associated
with the transaction were $158,000. In conjunction with the
sale, a deferred gain of $880,000 was recorded and is being
amortized over the ten-year term of the operating lease. At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company had a deferred gain
of $660,000 and $748,000, respectively, on the consolidated
balance sheet in Other Liabilities. Total
amortization of the gain for 2006, 2005, and 2004 was $88,000,
$88,000, and $44,000, respectively, for a total accumulated
amortization of $220,000 as of December 31, 2006.
|
|
16. |
Related Party Transactions |
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, the Company
held an $871,000 and $859,000 note receivable, including
$210,000 of accrued interest at December 31, 2006, from an
executive officer of the Company. Accrued interest at
December 31, 2005 was $198,000. This note arose from a
transaction in late 1998 in which the Company loaned the officer
funds to exercise 64,718 common stock options to cover the
exercise price and the taxes incurred as a result of the
exercise. The note bears interest equal to the Companys
borrowing rate and is due on demand any time after
January 1, 2002. The loan is partially collateralized by
64,718 shares of the Companys common stock under a
stock pledge agreement. For the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005, $31,500 and $42,000, respectively, have been paid
against the loan. As of December 31, 2006, the cumulative
amount that has been paid against this loan was $119,000.
On June 1, 2001, the Company and the officer entered into
an employment agreement, which provides the note is a
non-recourse loan and the Companys sole legal remedy in
the event of a default is the right to reclaim the shares
pledged under the stock pledge agreement. Also, if there is a
change in control of the Company and the officer is terminated
or if the officer is terminated without cause, the note is
cancelled and deemed paid in full. In these events, the officer
may also retain the pledged shares of the Company, or, at the
officers discretion, sell these shares back to the Company
at the then current market price or their book value, whichever
is greater.
If the officer is terminated by the Company for cause, the note
is cancelled and considered paid in full. In this case, however,
the officer forfeits the pledged shares of the Company, or, at
the Companys discretion, must sell these shares back to
the Company for a nominal amount.
If the officer terminates his employment during the term of the
agreement, the Company could demand full repayment of the note.
If the note was not paid by the officer on the demand of the
Company, the Companys only recourse is to reclaim the
shares of the Company that were pledged under the stock pledge
agreement.
|
|
17. |
Employee Benefit Plans |
Company employees over the age of
201/2
who have completed six months of service are eligible for
participation in The Meadowbrook, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing
Plan (the 401(k) Plan). The 401(k) Plan provides for
matching contributions and/or profit sharing contributions at
the discretion of the Board of Directors of Meadowbrook, Inc. In
2006, 2005, and 2004, the matching contributions were $852,000,
$806,000, and $600,000, respectively. There were no profit
sharing contributions in 2006, 2005, and 2004.
|
|
18. |
Fair Value of Financial Instruments |
SFAS No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of
Financial Instruments, requires companies to disclose
the fair value information about their financial instruments.
This standard excludes certain insurance related financial
assets and liabilities and all nonfinancial instruments from its
disclosure requirements.
Due to the short-term nature of cash and cash equivalents,
premiums and agent balances receivable, and accrued interest,
their estimated fair value approximates their carrying value.
Since debt and equity securities are recorded in the financial
statements at their estimated fair market value as securities
available for sale
95
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
under SFAS No. 115 Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, their
carrying value is their estimated fair value. The senior
debentures, junior subordinated debentures, and the
Companys line of credit bear variable rate interest, so
their estimated fair value approximates their carrying value. In
addition, the Companys derivative instruments, as
disclosed in Note 7 Derivative
Instruments, are recorded in accordance with
SFAS No. 133 Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, and therefore are
recorded at fair value.
|
|
19. |
Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited) |
The following is a summary of unaudited quarterly results of
operations for 2006 and 2005 (in thousands, except per share and
ratio data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st | |
|
2nd | |
|
3rd | |
|
4th | |
|
|
Quarter | |
|
Quarter | |
|
Quarter | |
|
Quarter | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross premiums written
|
|
$ |
89,010 |
|
|
$ |
74,261 |
|
|
$ |
85,827 |
|
|
$ |
81,774 |
|
Net premiums written
|
|
|
69,381 |
|
|
|
59,205 |
|
|
|
68,905 |
|
|
|
65,177 |
|
Net premiums earned
|
|
|
63,124 |
|
|
|
64,514 |
|
|
|
63,688 |
|
|
|
63,594 |
|
Net commissions and fees
|
|
|
11,289 |
|
|
|
10,698 |
|
|
|
9,612 |
|
|
|
9,573 |
|
Net investment income and realized gains/losses
|
|
|
5,232 |
|
|
|
5,405 |
|
|
|
5,612 |
|
|
|
5,895 |
|
Net losses and LAE incurred
|
|
|
37,043 |
|
|
|
37,146 |
|
|
|
36,129 |
|
|
|
35,975 |
|
Policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses
|
|
|
11,424 |
|
|
|
13,180 |
|
|
|
13,059 |
|
|
|
12,816 |
|
Other administrative expenses
|
|
|
7,959 |
|
|
|
7,275 |
|
|
|
6,908 |
|
|
|
7,272 |
|
Salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
13,368 |
|
|
|
13,846 |
|
|
|
14,183 |
|
|
|
13,172 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,388 |
|
|
|
1,499 |
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
|
|
1,531 |
|
Net income
|
|
|
5,625 |
|
|
|
5,375 |
|
|
|
5,093 |
|
|
|
5,941 |
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$ |
0.19 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
GAAP combined ratio(1)
|
|
|
96.2 |
% |
|
|
97.2 |
% |
|
|
97.2 |
% |
|
|
96.6 |
% |
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross premiums written
|
|
$ |
90,992 |
|
|
$ |
75,959 |
|
|
$ |
86,075 |
|
|
$ |
79,183 |
|
Net premiums written
|
|
|
68,990 |
|
|
|
61,288 |
|
|
|
67,420 |
|
|
|
60,436 |
|
Net premiums earned
|
|
|
60,787 |
|
|
|
63,364 |
|
|
|
63,205 |
|
|
|
62,603 |
|
Net commissions and fees
|
|
|
10,099 |
|
|
|
8,034 |
|
|
|
9,200 |
|
|
|
8,583 |
|
Net investment income and realized gains/losses
|
|
|
3,977 |
|
|
|
4,581 |
|
|
|
4,632 |
|
|
|
4,952 |
|
Net losses and LAE incurred
|
|
|
37,134 |
|
|
|
37,728 |
|
|
|
38,469 |
|
|
|
38,211 |
|
Policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses
|
|
|
10,822 |
|
|
|
10,971 |
|
|
|
11,947 |
|
|
|
10,699 |
|
Other administrative expenses
|
|
|
7,785 |
|
|
|
6,046 |
|
|
|
6,037 |
|
|
|
7,315 |
|
Salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
12,605 |
|
|
|
13,648 |
|
|
|
12,913 |
|
|
|
12,165 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
773 |
|
|
|
806 |
|
|
|
948 |
|
|
|
1,329 |
|
Net income
|
|
|
3,743 |
|
|
|
4,580 |
|
|
|
4,662 |
|
|
|
4,925 |
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$ |
0.13 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
GAAP combined ratio(1)
|
|
|
99.3 |
% |
|
|
97.1 |
% |
|
|
99.8 |
% |
|
|
98.7 |
% |
|
|
(1) |
Management uses the GAAP combined ratio and its components to
assess and benchmark underwriting performance. The GAAP combined
ratio is the sum of the GAAP loss and loss adjustment expense
ratio and the GAAP expense ratio. The GAAP loss and loss
adjustment expense ratio is the unconsolidated net incurred loss
and loss adjustment expense in relation to net earned premium.
The GAAP expense ratio is the unconsolidated policy acquisition
and other underwriting expenses in relation to net earned
premium. |
96
SCHEDULE I
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SUMMARY OF INVESTMENTS OTHER THAN
INVESTMENTS IN RELATED PARTIES
As of December 31, 2006
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount at | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shown in | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
the Balance | |
Type of Investment |
|
Cost | |
|
Value | |
|
Sheet | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Fixed Maturities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government and government agencies and authorities
|
|
$ |
52,991 |
|
|
$ |
52,752 |
|
|
$ |
52,752 |
|
States and political subdivisions
|
|
|
221,296 |
|
|
|
221,676 |
|
|
|
221,676 |
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
102,365 |
|
|
|
102,218 |
|
|
|
102,218 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
109,561 |
|
|
|
108,078 |
|
|
|
108,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Investments
|
|
$ |
486,213 |
|
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
$ |
484,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
SCHEDULE II
CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF REGISTRANT
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PARENT COMPANY ONLY
BALANCE SHEET
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
ASSETS |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries
|
|
|
252,428 |
|
|
|
225,475 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
3,024 |
|
|
|
3,024 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
28,137 |
|
|
|
25,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
283,653 |
|
|
$ |
254,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
Other liabilities
|
|
$ |
2,311 |
|
|
$ |
1,448 |
|
Payable to subsidiaries
|
|
|
16,719 |
|
|
|
14,270 |
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
Debentures
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
81,960 |
|
|
|
76,648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
Common stock
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
126,828 |
|
|
|
124,819 |
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
76,282 |
|
|
|
54,248 |
|
Note receivable from officer
|
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
(859 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(837 |
) |
|
|
(1,130 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
201,693 |
|
|
|
177,365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$ |
283,653 |
|
|
$ |
254,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
SCHEDULE II
CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF REGISTRANT
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PARENT COMPANY ONLY
INCOME STATEMENT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
2,690 |
|
|
$ |
2,198 |
|
|
$ |
466 |
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
6,375 |
|
|
|
4,233 |
|
|
|
2,369 |
|
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
3,970 |
|
|
|
3,540 |
|
|
|
2,898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
10,345 |
|
|
|
7,773 |
|
|
|
5,267 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and subsidiary equity
|
|
|
(7,654 |
) |
|
|
(5,575 |
) |
|
|
(4,801 |
) |
Federal and state income tax benefit
|
|
|
(2,878 |
) |
|
|
(2,203 |
) |
|
|
(1,906 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before subsidiary equity earnings
|
|
|
(4,776 |
) |
|
|
(3,372 |
) |
|
|
(2,895 |
) |
Subsidiary equity earnings
|
|
|
26,810 |
|
|
|
21,282 |
|
|
|
16,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99
SCHEDULE II
CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF REGISTRANT
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PARENT COMPANY ONLY
STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income
|
|
$ |
22,034 |
|
|
$ |
17,910 |
|
|
$ |
14,061 |
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain (losses) on securities:
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
(6,023 |
) |
|
|
(2,364 |
) |
|
|
Net deferred derivative gain hedging activity
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deconsolidation of subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
Less: reclassification adjustment for gains (losses) included in
net income
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive gain (loss)
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
(5,958 |
) |
|
|
(2,631 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
22,327 |
|
|
$ |
11,952 |
|
|
$ |
11,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
SCHEDULE II
CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF REGISTRANT
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
PARENT COMPANY ONLY
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net cash used in operating activities:
|
|
$ |
(1,488 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,437 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,489 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow from Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends from subsidiaries
|
|
|
4,629 |
|
|
|
6,089 |
|
|
|
3,678 |
|
|
Investment in subsidiaries
|
|
|
(4,600 |
) |
|
|
(15,600 |
) |
|
|
(13,539 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
(9,511 |
) |
|
|
(9,861 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow from Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from borrowings
|
|
|
12,500 |
|
|
|
9,500 |
|
|
|
3,744 |
|
|
Principal payments on borrowings
|
|
|
(10,500 |
) |
|
|
(13,544 |
) |
|
|
(8,700 |
) |
|
Net proceeds from issuance of debentures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,400 |
|
|
|
24,250 |
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
Share repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,191 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Other financing activities
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
1,450 |
|
|
|
12,266 |
|
|
|
19,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(5,682 |
) |
|
|
5,107 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
5,755 |
|
|
|
648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
$ |
5,755 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101
SCHEDULE III
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SUPPLEMENTARY INSURANCE INFORMATION
December 31, 2006
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Policy | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Losses, | |
|
|
|
Other Policy | |
|
|
|
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Claims & Loss | |
|
Unearned | |
|
Claims & Benefits | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Premium | |
|
Payable | |
|
Revenue | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
27,902 |
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
$ |
144,575 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
27,902 |
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
$ |
144,575 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Claims, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Losses & | |
|
Amortization of | |
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Investment | |
|
Settlement | |
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Operating | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Income | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Written | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
21,115 |
|
|
$ |
146,293 |
|
|
$ |
37,670 |
|
|
$ |
84,632 |
|
|
$ |
262,668 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,334 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
22,075 |
|
|
$ |
146,293 |
|
|
$ |
37,670 |
|
|
$ |
102,768 |
|
|
$ |
262,668 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
SCHEDULE III
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SUPPLEMENTARY INSURANCE INFORMATION
December 31, 2005
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Policy | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Losses, | |
|
|
|
Other Policy | |
|
|
|
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Claims & Loss | |
|
Unearned | |
|
Claims & | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Premium | |
|
Benefits Payable | |
|
Revenue | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
26,371 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
$ |
140,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
26,371 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
$ |
140,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Claims, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Losses & | |
|
Amortization of | |
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Investment | |
|
Settlement | |
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Operating | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Income | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Written | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
17,692 |
|
|
$ |
151,542 |
|
|
$ |
34,163 |
|
|
$ |
79,361 |
|
|
$ |
258,134 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,961 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,324 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
17,975 |
|
|
$ |
151,542 |
|
|
$ |
34,163 |
|
|
$ |
92,646 |
|
|
$ |
258,134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103
SCHEDULE III
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SUPPLEMENTARY INSURANCE INFORMATION
December 31, 2004
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Policy | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Losses, | |
|
|
|
Other Policy | |
|
|
|
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Claims & | |
|
Unearned | |
|
Claims & | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Loss Expenses | |
|
Premium | |
|
Benefits Payable | |
|
Revenue | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
25,167 |
|
|
$ |
378,157 |
|
|
$ |
134,302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
25,167 |
|
|
$ |
378,157 |
|
|
$ |
134,302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Claims, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Losses & | |
|
Amortization of | |
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Investment | |
|
Settlement | |
|
Deferred Policy | |
|
Operating | |
|
Premium | |
|
|
Income | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Acquisition Costs | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Written | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Speciality Risk Management Operations
|
|
$ |
14,887 |
|
|
$ |
135,938 |
|
|
$ |
25,280 |
|
|
$ |
83,978 |
|
|
$ |
233,961 |
|
Agency Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,097 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
14,911 |
|
|
$ |
135,938 |
|
|
$ |
25,280 |
|
|
$ |
88,686 |
|
|
$ |
233,961 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104
SCHEDULE IV
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
REINSURANCE
For the Years Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed | |
|
|
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
|
Ceded to | |
|
from | |
|
|
|
of Amount | |
|
|
Gross | |
|
Other | |
|
Other | |
|
Net | |
|
Assumed | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Companies | |
|
Companies | |
|
Amount | |
|
to Net | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Property and Liability Insurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$ |
251,288 |
|
|
$ |
72,367 |
|
|
$ |
75,999 |
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
|
29.81 |
% |
2005
|
|
$ |
264,381 |
|
|
$ |
75,563 |
|
|
$ |
61,141 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
|
24.46 |
% |
2004
|
|
$ |
247,169 |
|
|
$ |
74,375 |
|
|
$ |
41,699 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
|
19.44 |
% |
105
SCHEDULE V
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Deductions | |
|
|
|
|
Balance at | |
|
Charged to | |
|
Charged to | |
|
from | |
|
Balance at | |
|
|
Beginning | |
|
Costs and | |
|
Other | |
|
Allowance | |
|
End of | |
|
|
of Period | |
|
Expense | |
|
Accounts | |
|
Account | |
|
Period | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$ |
3,901 |
|
|
$ |
593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,546 |
|
|
$ |
2,948 |
|
2005
|
|
$ |
4,336 |
|
|
$ |
704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,139 |
|
|
$ |
3,901 |
|
2004
|
|
$ |
4,651 |
|
|
$ |
822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,137 |
|
|
$ |
4,336 |
|
106
SCHEDULE VI
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION CONCERNING PROPERTY AND
CASUALTY INSURANCE OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Reserves for | |
|
|
|
|
Deferred | |
|
Losses and | |
|
Discount, if any, | |
|
|
|
|
Policy | |
|
Loss | |
|
deducted from | |
|
|
|
Net | |
|
Net | |
|
|
Acquisition | |
|
Adjustment | |
|
previous | |
|
Unearned | |
|
Premiums | |
|
Investment | |
Affiliation with Registrant |
|
Costs | |
|
Expenses(2) | |
|
column(1) | |
|
Premiums(2) | |
|
Earned | |
|
Income | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
(a)Consolidated Property and Casualty Subsidiaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$ |
27,902 |
|
|
$ |
501,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
144,575 |
|
|
$ |
254,920 |
|
|
$ |
21,115 |
|
2005
|
|
$ |
26,371 |
|
|
$ |
458,677 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
140,990 |
|
|
$ |
249,959 |
|
|
$ |
17,692 |
|
2004
|
|
$ |
25,167 |
|
|
$ |
378,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
134,302 |
|
|
$ |
214,493 |
|
|
$ |
14,887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss | |
|
Amortization of | |
|
Paid losses | |
|
|
|
|
adjustment expense | |
|
deferred policy | |
|
and loss | |
|
Net | |
|
|
| |
|
acquisition | |
|
adjustment | |
|
Premiums | |
|
|
Current Year | |
|
Prior Years | |
|
expenses | |
|
expenses | |
|
Written | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
2006
|
|
$ |
149,012 |
|
|
$ |
(2,719 |
) |
|
$ |
37,670 |
|
|
$ |
115,061 |
|
|
$ |
262,668 |
|
2005
|
|
$ |
146,658 |
|
|
$ |
4,884 |
|
|
$ |
34,163 |
|
|
$ |
107,115 |
|
|
$ |
258,134 |
|
2004
|
|
$ |
131,409 |
|
|
$ |
4,529 |
|
|
$ |
25,280 |
|
|
$ |
97,972 |
|
|
$ |
233,961 |
|
|
|
(1) |
The Company does not employ any discounting techniques. |
|
(2) |
Reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses are shown gross
of $198.4 million, $187.3 million and
$151.2 million of reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses
in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Unearned premiums are
shown gross of ceded unearned premiums of $20.4 million,
$24.6 million and $26.1 million in 2006, 2005 and
2004, respectively. |
107
MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
Exhibit Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
Filing |
No. |
|
Description |
|
Basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Company |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
4 |
.1 |
|
Junior Subordinated Indenture between Meadowbrook Insurance
Group, Inc., and JP Morgan Chase Bank, dated
September 30, 2003 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
4 |
.2 |
|
Junior Subordinated Indenture between Meadowbrook Insurance
Group, Inc. and LaSalle Bank National Association, dated as of
September 16, 2005 |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
10 |
.1 |
|
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 1995
Stock Option Plan |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
10 |
.2 |
|
Meadowbrook, Inc. 401(k) and Profit Sharing Plan Trust, amended
and restated December 31, 1994 |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
10 |
.3 |
|
Demand Note dated November 9, 1998 among the Company and
Robert S. Cubbin and Kathleen D. Cubbin and Stock Pledge
Agreement |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
10 |
.4 |
|
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2002
Stock Option Plan |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
10 |
.5 |
|
Agency Agreement by and between Meadowbrook, Inc., Preferred
Insurance Agency, Inc., TPA Insurance Agency, Inc., Preferred
Comp Insurance Agency of New Hampshire, TPA Insurance Agency of
New Hampshire, Inc., Meadowbrook of Nevada, Inc., d/b/a
Meadowbrook Insurance Services, Meadowbrook of Florida, Inc.,
Association Self-Insurance Services, Inc., Commercial Carriers
Insurance Agency, Inc., and Star Insurance Company, Savers
Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Williamsburg National
Insurance Company, and Ameritrust Insurance Corporation, dated
January 1, 2003 |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
10 |
.6 |
|
Purchase Agreement among Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.,
Meadowbrook Capital Trust I, and Dekania CDO I, Ltd.,
dated September 30, 2003 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
10 |
.7 |
|
Amended and Restated Trust Agreement among Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc., JP Morgan Chase Bank, Chase
Manhattan Bank USA, National Association, and The Administrative
Trustees Named Herein, dated September 30, 2003 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
10 |
.8 |
|
Guaranty Agreement between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.,
and JP Morgan Chase Bank, dated September 30, 2003 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
10 |
.9 |
|
Employment Agreement between the Company and Robert S. Cubbin,
dated January 1, 2004 |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Employment Agreement between the Company and Michael G.
Costello, dated January 1, 2004 |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
10 |
.11 |
|
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. Long Term Incentive Plan |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
10 |
.12 |
|
Indenture between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, as Trustee, dated April 29, 2004 |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
10 |
.13 |
|
Indenture between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, dated May 26, 2004 |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
10 |
.14 |
|
Land Contract between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and MB
Center II LLC, dated July 15, 2004 |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
10 |
.15 |
|
Loan Agreement by and between Ameritrust Insurance Corporation,
Savers Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Star Insurance
Company, Williamsburg National Insurance Company, Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc., and Meadowbrook, Inc., dated
September 1, 2004 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.16 |
|
Credit Agreement among Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Standard Federal Bank National Association dated as of
November 12, 2004 |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
10 |
.17 |
|
Revolving Note among Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Standard Federal Bank National Association dated as of
November 12, 2004 |
|
|
(10 |
) |
108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
Filing |
No. |
|
Description |
|
Basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Security Agreement among Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Standard Federal Bank National Association dated as of
November 12, 2004 |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
10 |
.19 |
|
Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement under the
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., Stock Option Plan, dated
February 21, 2003 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Lease Agreement between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Meadowbrook, Inc., dated December 6, 2004 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.21 |
|
Master Lease Agreement between LaSalle National Leasing
Corporation and Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., dated
December 30, 2004 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Promissory Note between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Star Insurance Company, dated January 1, 2005 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.23 |
|
Commercial Mortgage between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.
and Star Insurance Company, dated January 1, 2005 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.24 |
|
Assignment of Leases and Rents between Meadowbrook Insurance
Group, Inc. and Star Insurance Company, dated January 1,
2005 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.25 |
|
Form of At-Will Employment and Severance Agreement by and among
Meadowbrook, Inc., Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., and Karen
M. Spaun, Stephen Belden, Gregory L. Wilde, Robert C.
Spring, Archie S. McIntyre, Arthur C. Pletz, Randolph W. Fort,
Angelo L. Williams, Susan L. Cubbin, and Kenn R. Allen, dated
January 1, 2005 and Steven C. Divine dated March 1,
2006 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.26 |
|
Amendment to Demand Note Addendum among the Company and
Robert S. Cubbin and Kathleen D. Cubbin, dated February 17,
2005 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
10 |
.27 |
|
Reciprocal Easement and Operation Agreement between Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc. and MB Center II, LLC, dated
May 9, 2005 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
10 |
.28 |
|
First Amendment to Land Contract between MB Center II, LLC
and Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc., dated May 20, 2005 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
10 |
.29 |
|
Amendment to Credit Agreement between Meadowbrook Insurance
Group, Inc. and Standard Federal Bank National Association,
dated May 20, 2005 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
10 |
.30 |
|
Second Amendment to Credit Agreement between Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc. and Standard Federal Bank National
Association, dated September 8, 2005 |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
10 |
.31 |
|
Purchase Agreement among Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.,
Meadowbrook Capital Trust II, and Merrill Lynch
International, dated as of September 16, 2005 |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
10 |
.32 |
|
Amended and Restated Trust Agreement among Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc., LaSalle Bank National Association,
Christiana Bank & Trust Company, and The Administrative
Trustees Named Herein, dated as of September 16, 2005 |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
10 |
.33 |
|
Guarantee Agreement between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.,
and LaSalle Bank National Association, dated as of
September 16, 2005 |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
10 |
.34 |
|
Convertible Note between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and
Renaissance Insurance Group, LLC, dated December 20, 2005 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
10 |
.35 |
|
Third Amendment to Credit Agreement between Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc. and LaSalle Bank Midwest National
Association, dated December 28, 2005 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
10 |
.36 |
|
Inter-Company Reinsurance Agreement by and between Star
Insurance Company and Ameritrust Insurance Company, Savers
Property and Casualty Insurance Company, and Williamsburg
National Insurance Company, dated January 1, 2006 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
10 |
.37 |
|
Form of Management Services Agreement by and between Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc., Meadowbrook, Inc., and Star Insurance
Company, Williamsburg National Insurance Co., Ameritrust
Insurance Corporation, American Indemnity Insurance Company,
Ltd., and Preferred Insurance Company, Ltd., respectively, each
dated January 1, 2006 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
10 |
.38 |
|
Management Services Agreement by and between Savers Property and
Casualty Insurance Company and Meadowbrook, Inc., dated
January 1, 2006 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
Filing |
No. |
|
Description |
|
Basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
.39 |
|
Employment Agreement between Meadowbrook, Inc., and Meadowbrook
Insurance Group, Inc. and Merton J. Segal, dated January 1,
2006 |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
10 |
.40 |
|
Executive Nonqualified Excess Plan, Plan Document, effective
May 1, 2006, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the
Companys Form 8-K, filed on May 31, 2006 |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
10 |
.41 |
|
Executive Nonqualified Excess Plan Adoption Agreement, effective
May 1, 2006, filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the
Companys Form 8-K, filed on May 31, 2006 |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
10 |
.42 |
|
Executive Nonqualified Excess Plan, Rabbi Trust Agreement,
between Meadowbrook, Inc. and Delaware Charter
Guarantee & Trust Company, conducting business as
Principal Trust Company, dated March 30, 2006 |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
14 |
|
|
Compliance Program/Code of Conduct |
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
PricewaterhouseCoopers Letter to the Commission dated
August 10, 2005, filed as Exhibit 16.1 to the
Companys Form 8-K, dated August 12, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
List of Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
.1 |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
(Ernst & Young LLP) |
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
.2 |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
(PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP) |
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Power of Attorney |
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
.1 |
|
Star Insurance Companys 2006 Schedule P |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
28 |
.2 |
|
Savers Property & Casualty Insurance Companys
2006 Schedule P |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
28 |
.3 |
|
Williamsburg National Insurance Companys 2006
Schedule P |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
28 |
.4 |
|
Ameritrust Insurance Corporations 2006 Schedule P |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
31 |
.1 |
|
Certification of Robert S. Cubbin, Chief Executive Officer of
the Corporation, pursuant to Securities Exchange Act
Rule 13a-14(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
.2 |
|
Certification of Karen M. Spaun, Chief Financial Officer of the
Corporation, pursuant to Securities Exchange Act
Rule 13a-14(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, signed by Robert S. Cubbin, Chief Executive Officer of
the Corporation |
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
.2 |
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, signed by Karen M. Spaun, Chief Financial Officer of
the Corporation |
|
|
|
|
|
99 |
.1 |
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of September 30, 1999, by and
between Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and First Chicago
Trust Company of New York, including the Certificate of
Designation, the form of Rights Certificate and the Summary of
Rights attached thereto as Exhibits A, B and C, respectively |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Incorporated by reference to
Form S-1
Registration Statement (No.
33-2626206) of
Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. declared effective
November 20, 1995. |
|
|
(2) |
Submitted in paper format under separate cover; see Form SE
filing. |
|
|
(3) |
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the
Companys
Form 8-A filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 12,
1999. |
|
|
(4) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-K for the
year ending December 31, 1998. |
|
|
(5) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 31, 2002. |
|
|
(6) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-K for the
year ending December 31, 2002. |
|
|
(7) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2003. |
|
|
(8) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-K for the
year ending December 31, 2003 |
|
|
(9) |
Filed as Appendix to Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. 2004
Proxy Statement. |
|
|
(10) |
Filed as Exhibit to Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on
November 18, 2004. |
|
(11) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2004. |
110
|
|
(12) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-K for the
year ending December 31, 2004. |
|
(13) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2005. |
|
(14) |
Filed as Exhibit to Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on
September 22, 2005. |
|
(15) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2005. |
|
(16) |
Filed as Exhibit to Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on
March 9, 2006. |
|
(17) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-K for the
year ending December 31, 2005. |
|
(18) |
Filed as Exhibit to
Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2006. |
111
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly
caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in Southfield, Michigan.
|
|
|
Meadowbrook Insurance
Group, Inc
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
Robert S. Cubbin |
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
Karen M. Spaun |
|
Senior Vice President and |
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
Dated: March 13, 2007
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
**
Merton
J. Segal |
|
Chairman and Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
Robert
S. Cubbin |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal
Executive Officer) |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Joseph
S. Dresner |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Hugh
W. Greenberg |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Florine
Mark |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Robert
H. Naftaly |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
David
K. Page |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Robert
W. Sturgis |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**
Bruce
E. Thal |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
112
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
**
Herbert
Tyner |
|
Director |
|
March 13, 2007 |
|
**By:
Robert
S. Cubbin,
Attorney-in-fact |
|
|
|
|
113