Single priced protection vs Embedding - what do customers want and what does it mean for risk?
Alex_Johnson
Posts: 36 QUANTEXA TEAM
More and more, the insurance market worries about product density, recognising that in some situations selling a 2nd policy to a customer can move the retention rate from ~60-70% to well about 90%.
So why wouldn't the market go further than that? Why not underwriting the entity not the event?
I think an insurance policy that covers multiple aspects of my life and the risks I take could be simpler, more tailored, more transparent and more flexible and means I wouldn't be pigeon holed into the traditional pricing methods of old for specific lines of coverage.
However, how far is coverage/product bundling going to go and does it pose an opportunity or a risk to insurers? Does it mean insurers have a better or a worse understanding of their exposures? Or is the way forward to build a more embedded market which could potentially mean tens/hundreds/thousands of insurance "point" policies packaged into your day-day purchases and activities?
So why wouldn't the market go further than that? Why not underwriting the entity not the event?
I think an insurance policy that covers multiple aspects of my life and the risks I take could be simpler, more tailored, more transparent and more flexible and means I wouldn't be pigeon holed into the traditional pricing methods of old for specific lines of coverage.
However, how far is coverage/product bundling going to go and does it pose an opportunity or a risk to insurers? Does it mean insurers have a better or a worse understanding of their exposures? Or is the way forward to build a more embedded market which could potentially mean tens/hundreds/thousands of insurance "point" policies packaged into your day-day purchases and activities?
Tagged:
0
Topics
- 101 Topics
- General Topics
- 27 Getting Started
- 4 Jobs Board
- Platform Topics