A match made in … how re/insurance M&A should be judged

21-12-2016

A match made in … how re/insurance M&A should be judged

alphaspirit/Shutterstock

After a spate of big deals and with consolidation in the re/insurance industry showing little sign of slowing, Intelligent Insurer examines the different ways the success—or failure—of a merger or acquisition may be judged in its aftermath.

Sometimes in the re/insurance world, the stars can align and two companies can come together, perfectly complementing each other’s business model: they will find easy cost and revenue synergies, offer complementary business lines, investors will be delighted and the people working for them will get on well together.

Unfortunately, deals do not always work out this way and some mergers and acquisitions (M&A) can end up with the attributes of a bad marriage: integration is difficult, there is friction between people, and growth, profits and the share price all suffer the consequences.

How should the success—or failure—of a deal be judged? And when? Here, we offer four perspectives on assessing whether a merger or acquisition was really worth it.


Cost-cutting and seeking growth: an intermediary’s perspective


Aon Securities, North America, Paul Schultz, Insurance, Reinsurance, M&A, S&P Global, Ratings, Dennis Sugrue, Boston Consulting Group, Paul Clark, Willis

Intelligent Insurer