Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Property - Casualty / General Insurance
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Actuarial Jobs by State

New York  New Jersey  Connecticut  Massachusetts 
California  Florida  Texas  Illinois  Colorado


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-30-2017, 10:59 AM
Klaymen's Avatar
Klaymen Klaymen is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Studying for this space for rent
Posts: 19,717
Default Auto Insurance Market to Shrink by 70% by 2050: KPMG

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news.../29/456094.htm

Autonomous vehicle technology, a rise in on-demand transportation and a shifting of liability to manufacturers will shrink the auto insurance sector by more than 70 percent or $137 billion by 2050, according to updated research by KPMG.

In a 2015 report, KPMG said the market would shrink by as much as 60 percent by 2040.

KPMG has said it extended its actuarial model by 10 years to 2050 and found that the pace of change has accelerated, pushing projections that illustrate greater declines to the insurance sector than KPMG’s previous 2015 study.

The updated study, The Chaotic Middle: The Autonomous Vehicle and Disruption in Automobile Insurance, also shows an increasing need for new types of insurance products.

KPMG said it now believes that traditional auto insurance carriers are facing the threat of obsolescence with auto manufacturers becoming the alternative to covering driving risk.

Chris Nyce, principal in KPMG’s Actuarial and Insurance Risk practice, said that building the latest observations into the actuarial model affirms the “projected long-term decline in the number of auto accidents overall, and the share of accident claims funded by personal auto policies will also contract.”

KPMG sees a 90 percent reduction on loss frequency by 2050. That along with severity declines and the effects of mobility on-demand transportation will mean a 71 percent drop in total losses, or $137 billion. The biggest effect will be felt by personal lines auto insurers— by 2050 only 22 percent of auto loss will be in personal auto.

Partially offsetting this, average repair costs will continue to increase at a higher rate than overall inflation as new technologies in future cars become more expensive to repair, Nyce said.

According to the consulting firm, three major forces are disrupting the current, $247 billion premium, auto insurance marketplace:

Autonomous technology is making cars increasingly safer, leading to a potential 90 percent reduction in accident frequency by 2050.
Auto manufacturers (OEMs) will assume more of the driving risk and associated liability, and have new opportunities to provide insurance to car buyers, taking market share away from traditional insurers. KPMG estimates that by 2050 there will be a significant increase in products liability insurance to 57 percent of total auto losses in order to cover the autonomous technology in vehicles, and a considerable decrease in personal auto insurance to 22 percent of total auto losses.
The rapid adoption of mobility-on-demand is quickly translating into the need for less personal auto coverage, with the use of fleets requiring commercial auto insurance.
Between now and 2019, consumers will begin experiencing the safety advantages of new technologies and attitudes will shift towards acceptance of autonomous driving, according to KPMG. Also the first autonomous cars will be on the roads. On-demand transport and car-sharing will continue to expand. By 2024, the majority of travel within cities and surrounding suburbs will be on-demand rather than with a personal vehicle, and by 2035 on-demand will be the norm in transportation, according to KMG’s projections. As a result, products liability coverage and other new types of insurance are expected to pay a greater share of claims resulting from roadway accidents.

KPMG said cyber risk is an example of a new type of risk associated with the era of driverless cars, and there will be a need for new products to cover the potential hacking of autonomous vehicles.

The trends seen by KPMG are in keeping with a report by Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty (AGCS) on the effect of technology on insurance. The report that found autonomous cars will reduce accident rates, shift liability from drivers to manufacturers and lead to a drop in car ownership in favor of motor fleets, car-sharing and driverless taxis.

All of this means that auto insurance carriers have their work cut out for them to survive, according to the advisory firm. The time for insurers to act is now, KPMG said.

“Insurance companies will have to make important strategic and tactical changes sooner than anticipated to navigate through this turbulent transformation of the industry,” said Jerry Albright, principal in KPMG’s Actuarial and Insurance Risk practice.

In the meantime, these new business models will “bring about a decade or so of a ‘chaotic middle’ as insurers adjust their strategies and operations as autonomous vehicle technologies significantly deplete the need for personal auto insurance.”

Insurance companies vary in their level of preparedness for this disruption but many have taken only limited action to face this challenge, according to Joe Schneider, managing director at KPMG Corporate Finance. “As a result, auto insurers may choose to branch out into home-related products, or other commercial coverage, to benefit from diversification,” he advised.

The auto insurance industry is further disrupted by the surge of “smart money” generated by a variety of sources including venture capital firms. “The infusion of capital is boosting the development of autonomous capabilities and related business models, thereby accelerating the pace at which highly automated vehicles will hit the market,” added Schneider.

KPMG sees wide acceptance of autonomous driving, despite recent reports that humans may be reluctant to turn over control to robots. An American Automobile Association survey found that more than three-quarters of Americans are afraid to ride in a self-driving car. A J.D. Power study showed almost every generation is fearful.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-30-2017, 11:23 AM
Westley Westley is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 28,772
Default

lol at projecting market dynamics 30 years out.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-30-2017, 11:50 AM
OnLevel OnLevel is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
lol at projecting market dynamics 30 years out.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-02-2017, 08:38 PM
Heywood J Heywood J is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,087
Default

Projecting the exact numbers is silly. Pretending that self-driving cars won't be a very bad thing for personal auto insurance is even more so. The only way this won't happen is if self-driving cars just don't pan out anywhere near as well as expected.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-02-2017, 08:43 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

While less certain than I was 2-3 years ago, I still believe that their will be a legislative transfer of risk from the manufacturers to the car owners. While the frequency is sure to decline, I do not believe most states will allow the insurance of car accidents to move mainly from a highly regulated personal auto policy to a virtually unregulated GL policy.
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-02-2017, 08:51 PM
Heywood J Heywood J is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
While less certain than I was 2-3 years ago, I still believe that their will be a legislative transfer of risk from the manufacturers to the car owners. While the frequency is sure to decline, I do not believe most states will allow the insurance of car accidents to move mainly from a highly regulated personal auto policy to a virtually unregulated GL policy.
Even if the insurance scheme doesn't change at all, you can't fight pure premium trends. There will be less damage overall to take a cut from.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-02-2017, 09:05 PM
MountainHawk's Avatar
MountainHawk MountainHawk is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salem, MA
Studying for Nothing!!!!
College: Lehigh University Alum
Favorite beer: Yuengling
Posts: 64,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heywood J View Post
Even if the insurance scheme doesn't change at all, you can't fight pure premium trends. There will be less damage overall to take a cut from.
Oh, I agree the premium is going to come way down. I'm just not there on the 'it could be covered by GL' train yet.
__________________

Play in the AO Prediction Game now!



1
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-02-2017, 09:12 PM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,643
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heywood J View Post
Even if the insurance scheme doesn't change at all, you can't fight pure premium trends. There will be less damage overall to take a cut from.
I'll believe the "less damage" mantra when it happens. Accidents may indeed be less frequent, but when they do happen, I suspect they will be doozies.

Remember, "To err is human, but to really mess things up, use a computer."
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Nov. 20, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Actuario View Post
Therapists should ask the right questions, not give the right answers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-02-2017, 09:31 PM
Vorian Atreides's Avatar
Vorian Atreides Vorian Atreides is offline
Wiki/Note Contributor
CAS
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: As far as 3 cups of sugar will take you
Studying for ACAS
College: Hard Knocks
Favorite beer: Most German dark lagers
Posts: 64,323
Default

In talking with a friend, it seems that one important part of the puzzle wrt "automation" is rarely recognized.

When a key part of the "automation" machine needs to be repaired/replaced . . . and said part cost significant $$$ (i.e., >$100), how likely are people going to pay that amount when they can still use the same vehicle (legally!) to get them around.

ALL of the "autonomy saves insurance dollars" numbers are predicated on a set of implicit assumptions:
  • The machinery is active
  • The machinery is functioning properly

When a key part is not operational . . .
__________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing

Why should I worry about dying? Itís not going to happen in my lifetime!


Freedom of speech is not a license to discourtesy

#BLACKMATTERLIVES
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-03-2017, 09:01 AM
Westley Westley is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 28,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
While the frequency is sure to decline, I do not believe most states will allow the insurance of car accidents to move mainly from a highly regulated personal auto policy to a virtually unregulated GL policy.
If that's the concern, seems like it's a lot easier to just regulate the GL policy.

Also, manufacturers are going to want to carve out the liability associated with owners taking control or owners asking the computer to do something stupid. That will be the complicated part, is figuring out how to integrate the two pieces of liability - the manufacturer piece versus remaining personal liability.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.26184 seconds with 11 queries