UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ
|
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010
OR
|
|
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the transition period from
to
Commission file number: 1-11238
NYMAGIC, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
New York
|
|
13-3534162
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
|
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
919 Third Avenue
|
|
10022
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
212 551-0600
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
None
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
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 whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and
posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to
submit and post such files).
Yes
o
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the
definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting
company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
o
|
|
Accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
o
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
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
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common
stock, as of the latest practicable date.
|
|
|
Class
|
|
Outstanding at August 1, 2010
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, $1.00 par value per share
|
|
8,499,513 shares
|
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report contains certain forward-looking statements concerning the Companys
operations, economic performance and financial condition, including, in particular, the
likelihood of the Companys success in developing and expanding its business. Any
forward-looking statements concerning the Companys operations, economic performance and
financial condition contained herein, including statements related to the outlook for the
Companys performance in 2010 and beyond, are made under the safe harbor provisions of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based upon a
number of assumptions and estimates which inherently are subject to uncertainties and
contingencies, many of which are beyond the control of the Company. Some of these
assumptions may not materialize and unanticipated events may occur which could cause
actual results to differ materially from such statements. These include, but are not
limited to, the failure of the Company to close its pending Agreement and Plan of Merger with ProSight Specialty Insurance Holdings, Inc., the cyclical nature of the insurance and reinsurance industry, premium rates,
investment results, hedge fund results, the estimation of loss
reserves and loss reserve development, uncertainties associated with asbestos and
environmental claims, including difficulties with assessing latent injuries and the
impact of litigation settlements, bankruptcies and potential legislation, the uncertainty
surrounding the losses related to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and those associated
with catastrophic hurricanes, the occurrence and effects of wars and acts of terrorism,
net loss retention, the effect of competition, the ability to collect reinsurance
receivables and the timing of such collections, the availability and cost of reinsurance,
the possibility that the outcome of any litigation or arbitration proceeding is
unfavorable, the ability to pay dividends, regulatory changes, changes in the ratings
assigned to the Company by rating agencies, failure to retain key personnel, the
possibility that our relationship with Mariner Partners, Inc. could terminate or change,
and the fact that ownership of our common stock is concentrated among a few major
stockholders and is subject to the voting agreement, as well as assumptions underlying
any of the foregoing and are generally expressed with words such as intends, intend,
intended, believes, estimates, expects, anticipates, plans, projects,
forecasts, goals, could have, may have and similar expressions. These risks could
cause actual results for the 2010 year and beyond to differ materially from those
expressed in any forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to
update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements.
|
|
|
Item 1.
|
|
Financial Statements
|
NYMAGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity at adjusted amortized cost (fair value $53,327,136 and $59,327,813)
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
Available for sale at fair value (amortized cost $18,950,707 and $385,378,334)
|
|
|
19,307,300
|
|
|
|
386,519,408
|
|
Equity securities available for sale at fair value (cost $101,780 and $117,968)
|
|
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
117,968
|
|
Commercial loans at fair value (amortized cost $6,147,214 and $7,738,677)
|
|
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
|
5,001,118
|
|
Limited partnerships at equity (cost $159,970,990 and $127,379,526)
|
|
|
180,305,807
|
|
|
|
151,891,838
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
8,897,261
|
|
|
|
8,788,718
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
399,299,281
|
|
|
|
66,755,909
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash and investments
|
|
|
665,047,072
|
|
|
|
675,664,663
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued investment income
|
|
|
332,451
|
|
|
|
3,365,535
|
|
Premiums and other receivables, net
|
|
|
33,528,073
|
|
|
|
24,753,976
|
|
Receivable for investments disposed
|
|
|
18,568,300
|
|
|
|
4,221,356
|
|
Reinsurance receivables on unpaid losses, net
|
|
|
187,667,196
|
|
|
|
205,077,080
|
|
Reinsurance receivables on paid losses, net
|
|
|
26,537,800
|
|
|
|
13,116,607
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs
|
|
|
20,507,270
|
|
|
|
16,438,088
|
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums
|
|
|
21,583,108
|
|
|
|
19,643,170
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
26,854,161
|
|
|
|
29,251,550
|
|
Property, improvements and equipment, net
|
|
|
14,053,837
|
|
|
|
14,602,141
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
9,194,065
|
|
|
|
4,074,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,023,873,333
|
|
|
$
|
1,010,208,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
$
|
538,483,914
|
|
|
$
|
555,485,502
|
|
Reserve for unearned premiums
|
|
|
107,177,522
|
|
|
|
89,458,244
|
|
Ceded reinsurance payable
|
|
|
17,478,832
|
|
|
|
13,580,535
|
|
Notes payable
|
|
|
100,000,000
|
|
|
|
100,000,000
|
|
Dividends payable
|
|
|
1,146,679
|
|
|
|
737,308
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
28,758,172
|
|
|
|
34,937,369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
793,045,119
|
|
|
|
794,198,958
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
15,833,490
|
|
|
|
15,796,465
|
|
Paid-in capital
|
|
|
53,593,923
|
|
|
|
51,699,572
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(22,050,646
|
)
|
|
|
(22,977,781
|
)
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
271,488,038
|
|
|
|
259,527,967
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,864,805
|
|
|
|
304,046,223
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost, 7,333,977 shares
|
|
|
(88,036,591
|
)
|
|
|
(88,036,591
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
230,828,214
|
|
|
|
216,009,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
1,023,873,333
|
|
|
$
|
1,010,208,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
- 2 -
NYMAGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums earned
|
|
$
|
89,280,566
|
|
|
$
|
79,170,667
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
14,426,444
|
|
|
|
19,742,704
|
|
Net realized investment gains
|
|
|
7,207,898
|
|
|
|
1,774,543
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other-than-temporary impairments
|
|
|
(300,199
|
)
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
Portion of loss recognized in OCI (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment loss recognized in earnings
|
|
|
(300,199
|
)
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission and other income
|
|
|
85,616
|
|
|
|
127,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
110,700,325
|
|
|
|
100,336,977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred
|
|
|
52,482,795
|
|
|
|
38,011,691
|
|
Policy acquisition expenses
|
|
|
20,626,360
|
|
|
|
17,826,390
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
22,856,240
|
|
|
|
20,478,159
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
3,371,116
|
|
|
|
3,364,031
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
99,336,511
|
|
|
|
79,680,271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
11,363,814
|
|
|
|
20,656,706
|
|
Income tax provision:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
(4,265,530
|
)
|
|
|
358,790
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
1,898,161
|
|
|
|
2,615,676
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(2,367,369
|
)
|
|
|
2,974,466
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
13,731,183
|
|
|
$
|
17,682,240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding-basic
|
|
|
8,485,932
|
|
|
|
8,417,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
1.62
|
|
|
$
|
2.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding-diluted
|
|
|
8,786,342
|
|
|
|
8,607,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
1.56
|
|
|
$
|
2.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per share
|
|
$
|
.20
|
|
|
$
|
.08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
- 3 -
NYMAGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums earned
|
|
$
|
45,575,199
|
|
|
$
|
39,041,070
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
7,381,246
|
|
|
|
13,190,792
|
|
Net realized investment gains
|
|
|
5,384,096
|
|
|
|
2,191,241
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other-than-temporary impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
Portion of loss recognized in OCI (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment loss recognized in earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission and other income
|
|
|
81,465
|
|
|
|
122,272
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
58,422,006
|
|
|
|
54,066,968
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred
|
|
|
28,945,533
|
|
|
|
17,329,363
|
|
Policy acquisition expenses
|
|
|
10,393,719
|
|
|
|
8,529,910
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
11,584,378
|
|
|
|
10,433,910
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,687,177
|
|
|
|
1,683,818
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
52,610,807
|
|
|
|
37,977,001
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
5,811,199
|
|
|
|
16,089,967
|
|
Income tax provision:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
(984,692
|
)
|
|
|
1,145,505
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(88,440
|
)
|
|
|
740,226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(1,073,132
|
)
|
|
|
1,885,731
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
6,884,331
|
|
|
$
|
14,204,236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding-basic
|
|
|
8,499,161
|
|
|
|
8,424,206
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
.81
|
|
|
$
|
1.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding-diluted
|
|
|
8,823,618
|
|
|
|
8,625,087
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
.78
|
|
|
$
|
1.65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per share
|
|
$
|
.10
|
|
|
$
|
.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
- 4 -
NYMAGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Cash flows (used in) provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
13,731,183
|
|
|
$
|
17,682,240
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for deferred taxes
|
|
|
1,898,161
|
|
|
|
2,615,676
|
|
Net realized investment gain
|
|
|
(7,207,898
|
)
|
|
|
(1,774,543
|
)
|
Net impairment loss recognized in earnings
|
|
|
300,199
|
|
|
|
478,407
|
|
Equity in earnings of limited partnerships
|
|
|
(6,691,629
|
)
|
|
|
(9,190,282
|
)
|
Net amortization from bonds and commercial loans
|
|
|
(53,628
|
)
|
|
|
265,796
|
|
Depreciation and other, net
|
|
|
419,086
|
|
|
|
654,111
|
|
Trading portfolio activities
|
|
|
3,198
|
|
|
|
15,470,658
|
|
Commercial loan activities
|
|
|
1,673,596
|
|
|
|
(1,612,331
|
)
|
Changes in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums and other receivables
|
|
|
(8,774,097
|
)
|
|
|
(12,546,599
|
)
|
Reinsurance receivables paid and unpaid, net
|
|
|
3,988,691
|
|
|
|
8,831,187
|
|
Ceded reinsurance payable
|
|
|
3,898,297
|
|
|
|
1,958,519
|
|
Accrued investment income
|
|
|
3,033,084
|
|
|
|
890,553
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs
|
|
|
(4,069,182
|
)
|
|
|
(2,517,641
|
)
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums
|
|
|
(1,939,938
|
)
|
|
|
(5,559,966
|
)
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(5,119,641
|
)
|
|
|
151,311
|
|
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses
|
|
|
(17,001,588
|
)
|
|
|
3,934,421
|
|
Reserve for unearned premiums
|
|
|
17,719,278
|
|
|
|
14,692,409
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(6,179,197
|
)
|
|
|
9,309,916
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
(24,103,208
|
)
|
|
|
26,051,602
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
|
|
|
(10,372,025
|
)
|
|
|
43,733,842
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity fixed maturities matured, repaid and redeemed
|
|
|
5,051,203
|
|
|
|
3,931,388
|
|
Available for sale fixed maturities acquired
|
|
|
(345,751,245
|
)
|
|
|
(273,469,418
|
)
|
Available for sale fixed maturities sold
|
|
|
719,040,449
|
|
|
|
204,813,774
|
|
Available for sale equity securities sold
|
|
|
53,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributed to limited partnerships
|
|
|
(45,806,966
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions and redemptions from limited partnerships
|
|
|
24,084,631
|
|
|
|
11,878,489
|
|
Net purchase of short-term investments
|
|
|
(108,544
|
)
|
|
|
(25,179,966
|
)
|
Receivable for investments disposed and not yet settled
|
|
|
(14,346,944
|
)
|
|
|
19,671,995
|
|
Acquisition of property & equipment, net
|
|
|
129,218
|
|
|
|
(3,319,948
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
342,345,762
|
|
|
|
(61,673,686
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from stock issuance and other
|
|
|
1,931,376
|
|
|
|
918,228
|
|
Cash dividends paid to stockholders
|
|
|
(1,361,741
|
)
|
|
|
(794,551
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
569,635
|
|
|
|
123,677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
|
|
|
332,543,372
|
|
|
|
(17,816,167
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
66,755,909
|
|
|
|
75,672,102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
399,299,281
|
|
|
$
|
57,855,935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$
|
3,250,000
|
|
|
$
|
3,251,388
|
|
Net federal income tax paid
|
|
$
|
1,514,619
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
- 5 -
(1) Basis of Presentation and Accounting Policies
Basis of presentation
The interim consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and are unaudited. In the opinion of
management, all material adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of results have
been reflected for such periods. Adjustments to financial statements consist of normal
recurring items. The results of operations for any interim period are not necessarily
indicative of results for the full year. These financial statements and related notes
should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto contained
in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP 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
consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and claims and
expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Adoption of new accounting pronouncements
In June 2009, the FASB issued ASC
860, Transfers and Servicing (“ASC 860”). ASC 860 amends the
derecognition guidance in Statement 140 and eliminates the concept of
qualifying special-purpose entities (“QSPEs”). ACS 860 is effective
for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2009.
Early adoption of ASC 860 was prohibited. The Company adopted ASC 860 during
the first quarter of 2010 and the adoption did not have an effect on its
results of operations, financial position or liquidity.
In June 2009, the FASB issued ASC
810, (“ASC 810”), which amends the consolidation guidance
applicable to variable interest entities (“VIE”). An entity would
consolidate a VIE, as the primary beneficiary, when the entity has both of the
following characteristics: (a) The power to direct the activities of a VIE
that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and
(b) The obligation to absorb losses of the entity that could potentially
be significant to the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the entity that
could potentially be significant to the VIE. Ongoing reassessment of whether an
enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE is required. ASC 810 amends
interpretation 46(R) to eliminate the quantitative approach previously required
for determining the primary beneficiary of a VIE. This Statement is effective
for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2009.
The Company adopted ASC 810 during the first quarter of 2010 and the adoption
did not have an effect on its results of operations, financial position or
liquidity.
In June 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-09,
Amendments to Certain Recognition and
Disclosure Requirements.
ASU 2010-09 is an amendment of ASC 855,
Subsequent Events.
ASC
855 established that an entity should disclose the date through which subsequent events
have been evaluated. ASU 2010-09 amends ASC 855 to state that an SEC filer is not
required to disclose the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated. The
Company adopted ASU 2010-09 during the second quarter of 2010 and the adoption did not
have an effect on its results of operations, financial position or liquidity.
Future adoption of new accounting pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-06,
Improving Disclosures about Fair Value
Measurements.
ASU 2010-06 is an amendment of ASC 820,
Fair Value Measurements and
Disclosures.
ASU 2010-06 provides additional disclosures for transfers in and out of the
Levels I and II and for activity in Level III as well as clarifies certain existing
disclosure requirements including level of desegregation and disclosures around inputs
and valuation techniques. The final amendments to ASU 2010-06 were effective for annual
and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the
requirement to provide the Level 3 activity for purchases, sales, issuances, and
settlements on a gross basis. That requirement will be effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The
Company adopted ASU 2010-06 during the first quarter of 2010 and the adoption did not
have an effect on its results of operations, financial position or liquidity. The portion
of ASU 2010-06 that has not yet been adopted is not expected to have a material impact on
our Companys financial position, cash flows or results of operations.
- 6 -
(2) Investments:
A summary of the Companys investment portfolio components at June 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities held to maturity (adjusted
amortized cost):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
|
8.09
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
|
|
8.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities held to maturity
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
|
8.09
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
|
|
8.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale (fair value):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
|
$
|
18,484,492
|
|
|
|
2.78
|
%
|
|
$
|
385,715,035
|
|
|
|
57.09
|
%
|
Municipal obligations
|
|
|
822,808
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
%
|
|
|
804,373
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
$
|
19,307,300
|
|
|
|
2.90
|
%
|
|
$
|
386,519,408
|
|
|
|
57.21
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities
|
|
$
|
73,091,811
|
|
|
|
10.99
|
%
|
|
$
|
443,109,112
|
|
|
|
65.58
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities available for sale (fair value):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
408,196,542
|
|
|
|
61.38
|
%
|
|
$
|
75,544,627
|
|
|
|
11.18
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities, equity securities, cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
481,390,133
|
|
|
|
72.39
|
%
|
|
$
|
518,771,707
|
|
|
|
76.78
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans (fair value)
|
|
$
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,001,118
|
|
|
|
0.74
|
%
|
Limited partnership hedge funds (equity)
|
|
$
|
180,305,807
|
|
|
|
27.11
|
%
|
|
$
|
151,891,838
|
|
|
|
22.48
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment portfolio
|
|
$
|
665,047,072
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
675,664,663
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2010, 91.5% of the Companys fixed income and short-term investment
portfolios were considered investment grade by S&P.
Short-term investments, which have maturity of one year or less from the date of
purchase, are carried at amortized cost, which approximates fair value. The Company
considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an original maturity of three
months or less to be cash equivalents. The Companys investment in limited partnerships
at equity include hedge fund interests in limited partnerships and limited liability
companies.
- 7 -
Details of the residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) portfolio as of June 30,
2010, including publicly available qualitative information, are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan to
|
|
|
FICO
|
|
|
D60+
|
|
|
Credit
|
|
|
S&P
|
|
Moodys
|
Security
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value %
|
|
|
Credit
|
|
|
Delinquency
|
|
|
Support
|
|
|
Rating
|
|
Rating
|
description
|
|
Issue date
|
|
|
amortized
cost (6)
|
|
|
Fair value
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
Score (2)
|
|
|
Rate (3)
|
|
|
Level (4)
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
(5)
|
AHMA 2006-3
|
|
|
7/2006
|
|
|
$
|
10,666,400
|
|
|
$
|
9,854,819
|
|
|
|
84.9
|
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
|
|
|
36.9
|
|
|
AA
|
|
Caa1
|
CWALT 2005-69
|
|
|
11/2005
|
|
|
|
6,865,539
|
|
|
|
6,414,370
|
|
|
|
81.1
|
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
51.6
|
|
|
|
47.7
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
Ba3
|
CWALT 2005-76
|
|
|
12/2005
|
|
|
|
6,752,551
|
|
|
|
6,659,662
|
|
|
|
81.6
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
54.9
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
B2
|
RALI 2005-QO3
|
|
|
10/2005
|
|
|
|
7,178,258
|
|
|
|
5,948,895
|
|
|
|
80.4
|
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
44.6
|
|
|
|
39.9
|
|
|
B-
|
|
B1
|
WaMu 2005-AR17
|
|
|
12/2005
|
|
|
|
5,844,676
|
|
|
|
6,684,510
|
|
|
|
73.0
|
|
|
|
715
|
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
49.5
|
|
|
AAA
|
|
A1
|
WaMu 2006-AR9
|
|
|
7/2006
|
|
|
|
8,048,422
|
|
|
|
8,550,953
|
|
|
|
74.2
|
|
|
|
731
|
|
|
|
34.0
|
|
|
|
22.9
|
|
|
B
|
|
Ba1
|
WaMu 2006-AR13
|
|
|
9/2006
|
|
|
|
8,428,665
|
|
|
|
9,213,927
|
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
33.5
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
B3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The dollar-weighted average amortized loan-to-original value of the underlying loans at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Average FICO at origination of remaining borrowers in the loan pool at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(3)
|
|
The percentage of the current outstanding principal balance that is more than 60 days delinquent as of July 25, 2010. This
includes loans that are in foreclosure and real estate owned.
|
|
(4)
|
|
The current credit support provided by subordinate ranking tranches within the overall security structure at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(5)
|
|
Ratings as of July 25, 2010.
|
|
(6)
|
|
After OTTI recognized in OCI.
|
The Companys cash flow analysis for each of these securities attempts to estimate the
likelihood of any future impairment. While the Company does not believe there are any
other than temporary impairments (OTTI) currently, future estimates may change
depending upon the actual performance statistics reported for each security to the
Company. This may result in future charges based upon revised estimates for delinquency
rates, severity rates or prepayment patterns. These changes in estimates may be material.
These securities are collateralized by pools of Alt-A mortgages, and receive priority
payments from these pools. The Companys securities rank senior to subordinated tranches
of debt collateralized by each respective pool of mortgages. The Company has collected
all applicable interest and principal repayments on such securities to date. As of
July 25, 2010, the levels of subordination ranged from 22.9% to 49.5% of the total debt
outstanding for each pool. Delinquencies within the underlying mortgage pools ranged from
28.3% to 54.9% of total amounts outstanding. For comparison purposes, as of July 25,
2009, delinquencies ranged from 25.3% to 47.2%, while subordination levels ranged from
26.2% to 51.2%. Delinquency rates are not the same as severity rates, or actual loss, but
are an indication of the potential for losses of some degree in future periods.
The fair value of each RMBS investment is based on the framework established in ASC 820
(See Note 3). Fair value is determined by estimating the price at which an asset might be
sold on the measurement date. There has been a considerable amount of turmoil in the U.S.
housing market since 2007, which has led to market declines in the Companys RMBS
securities. Because the pricing of these investments is complex and has many variables
affecting price including, projected delinquency rates, projected severity rates,
estimated loan to value ratios, vintage year, subordination levels, projected prepayment
speeds and expected rates of return required by prospective purchasers, the estimated
price of such securities will differ among brokers depending on these facts and
assumptions. While many of the inputs utilized in pricing are observable, many other
inputs are unobservable and will vary depending upon the broker. During periods of market
dislocation, such as current market conditions, it is increasingly difficult to value
such investments because trading becomes less frequent and/or market data becomes less
observable. As a result, valuations may include inputs and assumptions that are less
observable or require greater estimation and judgment as well as valuation methods that
are more complex. For example, assumptions regarding projected delinquency and severity
rates have become very pessimistic due to uncertainties associated with the residential
real estate markets. Additionally, there are only a limited number of prospective
purchasers of such securities and such purchasers generally demand high expected returns
in the current market. This has resulted in lower quotes from securities dealers, who
are, themselves, reluctant to position such securities because of financing
uncertainties. Accordingly, the dealer quotes used to establish fair value may not be
reflective of the expected future cash flows from a security and, therefore, not
reflective of its intrinsic value.
- 8 -
As of June 30, 2010, there was variance in RMBS securities prices from different pricing
sources. Management also determined that the few trades of RMBS were not consistent with
the prices received and analysis performed at quarter end. This confirmed managements
previously established view that the market is dislocated and illiquid. Accordingly, the
Company determined fair value using a matrix pricing analysis. The pricing matrix was
based on risk profile and qualitative and quantitative data for similar vintage RMBS that
had recently established prices. The securities were evaluated in each of the following 9
categories: sector, collateral, current S&P rating, current credit support, 3 month
conditional default rate, 3 month voluntary prepayment, 1 month loss severity, 60+
delinquencies, and FICO score. The price for each RMBS was based upon the prices of those
RMBS securities that had the similar underlying characteristics to the Companys RMBS
portfolio.
There are government sponsored programs that may affect the performance of the Companys
RMBS. The Company is uncertain as to the impact, if any, these programs will have on the
fair value of the Companys RMBS. The fair value of such securities at June 30, 2010 was
approximately $53.3 million.
The gross unrealized gains and losses on fixed maturities held to maturity and available
for sale at June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTTI
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Recognized
|
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
In OCI (a)
|
|
|
(after OTTI)
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
RMBS
|
|
$
|
88,065,174
|
|
|
$
|
(34,280,663
|
)
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
$
|
2,127,627
|
|
|
$
|
(2,585,002
|
)
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
U.S. Treasury
securities
available for sale
|
|
|
18,210,304
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,210,304
|
|
|
|
274,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,484,492
|
|
Municipal
obligations
available for sale
|
|
|
740,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
740,404
|
|
|
|
82,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
822,808
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
107,015,882
|
|
|
$
|
(34,280,663
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,735,219
|
|
|
$
|
2,484,219
|
|
|
$
|
(2,585,002
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,634,436
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTTI
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Recognized
|
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
In OCI (a)
|
|
|
(after OTTI)
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
RMBS
|
|
$
|
93,081,210
|
|
|
$
|
(36,491,506
|
)
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
|
$
|
5,077,950
|
|
|
$
|
(2,339,841
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,327,813
|
|
U.S. Treasury
securities
available for sale
|
|
|
384,638,048
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
384,638,048
|
|
|
|
1,317,809
|
|
|
|
(240,822
|
)
|
|
|
385,715,035
|
|
Municipal
obligations
available for sale
|
|
|
740,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
740,286
|
|
|
|
64,087
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
804,373
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
478,459,544
|
|
|
$
|
(36,491,506
|
)
|
|
$
|
441,968,038
|
|
|
$
|
6,459,846
|
|
|
$
|
(2,580,663
|
)
|
|
$
|
445,847,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
Effective April 1, 2009, the Company adopted a new accounting
standard resulting in a reclassification in the amount of
$40.1 million of non-credit investment impairment losses
previously recognized on the Companys RMBS holdings that are
currently being held to maturity. These securities are categorized
as non-credit based on the Companys impairment analysis. The
Company is accreting from OCI to the amortized cost of the RMBS
over their remaining life in a prospective manner on the basis of
the amount and timing of future cash flows. The amount of the
accretion was $2.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010.
The amount of accretion for the period April 1, 2009 to December
31, 2009 was $3.7 million.
|
- 9 -
Net investment income from each major category of investments for the periods indicated
is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Fixed maturities held to maturity
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
Trading securities
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Commercial loans
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
Equity in earnings of limited partnerships
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment income
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
Investment expenses
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
$
|
14.4
|
|
|
$
|
19.7
|
|
|
$
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
13.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Details related to investment income from commercial loans and trading activities
presented in the preceding table are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Interest and dividends earned
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
Net realized gains (losses)
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized (depreciation) appreciation
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment income from commercial
loans and trading activities
|
|
$
|
3.6
|
|
|
$
|
5.6
|
|
|
$
|
3.6
|
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 10 -
The following tables summarize all fixed maturity securities in an unrealized loss
position at June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, disclosing the aggregate fair value and
gross unrealized loss for less than as well as more than 12 months:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 months
|
|
|
12 months or longer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
mortgage-backed
securities held to
maturity
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
$
|
(34,738,039
|
)
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
$
|
(34,738,039
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily
impaired securities
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
$
|
(34,738,039
|
)
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
$
|
(34,738,039
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 months
|
|
|
12 months or longer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
mortgage-backed
securities held to
maturity
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
59,327,813
|
|
|
$
|
(33,753,397
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,327,813
|
|
|
$
|
(33,753,397
|
)
|
U.S. Treasury Securities
|
|
|
198,588,058
|
|
|
|
(240,822
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198,588,058
|
|
|
|
(240,822
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total temporarily
impaired securities
|
|
$
|
198,588,058
|
|
|
|
(240,822
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,327,813
|
|
|
$
|
(33,753,397
|
)
|
|
$
|
257,915,871
|
|
|
$
|
(33,994,219
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2010, the Company was holding seven fixed maturity securities that were
in an unrealized loss position. The Company believes these unrealized losses are
temporary, as they resulted from changes in market conditions, including interest rates
or sector spreads, and are not considered to be credit risk related. The Company does not
intend to sell nor does it expect to be required to sell the securities outlined above.
The amortized cost and fair value of debt securities that are not included in the
Companys commercial loan portfolio at June 30, 2010 are shown below by contractual
maturity. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities, because borrowers
may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment
penalties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due in one year or less
|
|
$
|
6,361,027
|
|
|
$
|
6,456,957
|
|
Due after one year through five years
|
|
|
11,849,276
|
|
|
|
12,027,535
|
|
Due after five years through ten years
|
|
|
482,054
|
|
|
|
529,205
|
|
Due after ten years
|
|
|
258,350
|
|
|
|
293,603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
18,950,707
|
|
|
|
19,307,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
72,735,218
|
|
|
$
|
72,634,436
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 11 -
The components for net realized gains (losses) for the six months ended June 30, 2010
and 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized gains (losses) on investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities gains
|
|
$
|
7,424,553
|
|
|
$
|
3,794,847
|
|
|
$
|
5,583,882
|
|
|
$
|
2,463,459
|
|
Equity securities gains
|
|
|
37,772
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,772
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities losses
|
|
|
(254,427
|
)
|
|
|
(1,882,468
|
)
|
|
|
(237,558
|
)
|
|
|
(271,993
|
)
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(137,836
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(225
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized investment gains before impairments
|
|
|
7,207,898
|
|
|
|
1,774,543
|
|
|
|
5,384,096
|
|
|
|
2,191,241
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities impairments
|
|
|
(300,199
|
)
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(478,407
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized investment gains after impairments
|
|
$
|
6,907,699
|
|
|
$
|
1,296,136
|
|
|
$
|
5,384,096
|
|
|
$
|
1,712,834
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from redemptions in investments held to maturity or disposals of fixed
income investments available for sale for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009
were $724,091,652 and $208,745,162, respectively.
The OTTI of $300,199 recognized for the six months ended June 30, 2010 resulted from the
Companys intention to sell certain U.S. Treasury securities under circumstances in which
those securities are not expected to recover their entire amortized cost prior to sale.
The Company recorded declines in values of investments considered to be OTTI of $478,407
for the six months ended June 30, 2009, resulting from the Companys intention to sell
certain municipal securities whereby those securities were not expected to recover their
entire amortized cost prior to sale.
The Company maintains a portfolio of municipal bonds that has an average S&P rating of
AAA. The average S&P rating includes certain municipal bonds that carry the benefit of
insurance that provides credit enhancement. Excluding the benefit of this credit
enhancement, the portfolio of municipal bonds has an average underlying S&P rating of A.
The Company purchases municipal bonds with the intent to rely upon the underlying credit
rating of the security exclusive of the credit enhancement provided by any financial
guarantor.
The following table lists the financial guarantors, as well as the average S&P ratings
and the average underlying S&P ratings, excluding the impact of credit enhancement, of
the guaranteed municipal bonds in our investment portfolio in which there are a total of
two municipal securities with a fair value of approximately $823,000 containing credit
enhancements. The Company does not have any investments directly in the following
financial guarantors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
S&P
|
|
Underlying
|
Financial Guarantors
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Rating
|
|
Rating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Guaranty Insurance Company
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
AAA
|
|
AAA
|
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corporation
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
AAA
|
|
BBB-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) Fair Value Measurements:
The Companys estimates of fair value for financial assets and financial liabilities are
based on the framework established in ASC 820. The framework is based on the inputs used
in valuation and gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and
requires that observable inputs be used in the valuations when available. The disclosure
of fair value estimates in the ASC 820 hierarchy is based on whether the significant
inputs into the valuation are observable. In determining the level of the hierarchy in
which the estimate is disclosed, the highest priority is given to unadjusted quoted
prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs that reflect the
Companys significant market assumptions. The standard describes three levels of inputs
that may be used to measure fair value and categorize the assets and liabilities within
the hierarchy:
Level 1
Fair value is based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are
accessible to the Company for identical assets or liabilities. These prices generally
provide the most reliable evidence and are used to measure fair value whenever available.
Active markets are defined as having the following for the measured asset/liability: i)
many transactions, ii) current prices, iii) price quotes not varying substantially among
market makers, iv) narrow bid/ask spreads and v) most information publicly available.
- 12 -
The Companys Level 1 assets are comprised of U.S. Treasury securities, which are highly
liquid and traded in active exchange markets.
The Company uses the quoted market prices as fair value for assets classified as Level 1.
The Company receives quoted market prices from a third party, a nationally recognized
pricing service. Prices are obtained from available sources for market transactions
involving identical assets. For the majority of Level 1 investments, the Company receives
quoted market prices from an independent pricing service. The Company validates primary
source prices by back testing to trade data to confirm that the pricing services
significant inputs are observable. The Company also compares the prices received from the
third party service to other third party sources to validate the consistency of the
prices received on securities.
Level 2
Fair value is based on significant inputs, other than Level 1 inputs, that are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially
the full term of the asset through corroboration with observable market data. Level 2
inputs include quoted market prices in active markets for similar assets, non-binding
quotes in markets that are not active for identical or similar assets and other market
observable inputs (e.g., interest rates, yield curves, prepayment speeds, default rates
loss severities, etc.).
The Companys Level 2 assets include municipal debt obligations.
The Company generally obtains valuations from third party pricing services and/or
security dealers for identical or comparable assets or liabilities by obtaining
non-binding broker quotes (when pricing service information is not available) in order to
determine an estimate of fair value. The Company bases all of its estimates of fair value
for assets on the bid price as it represents what a third party market participant would
be willing to pay in an arms length transaction. Prices from pricing services are
validated by the Company through comparison to prices from corroborating sources and are
validated by back testing to trade data to confirm that the pricing services significant
inputs are observable. Under certain conditions, the Company may conclude the prices
received from independent third party pricing services or brokers are not reasonable or
reflective of market activity or that significant inputs are not observable, in which
case it may choose to over-ride the third-party pricing information or quotes received
and apply internally developed values to the related assets or liabilities. In such
cases, those valuations would be generally classified as Level 3. Generally, the Company
utilizes an independent pricing service to price its municipal debt obligations.
Currently, these securities are exhibiting low trade volume. The Company considers such
investments to be in the Level 2 category.
Level 3
Fair value is based on at least one or more significant unobservable inputs that
are supported by little or no market activity for the asset. These inputs reflect the
Companys understanding about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing
the asset or liability.
The Companys Level 3 assets include its RMBS, commercial loans and common stocks as they
are illiquid and trade in inactive markets. These markets are considered inactive as a
result of the low level of trades of such investments. The RMBS investments are not
considered within the Level 3 tabular disclosure, because they have been transferred to
held to maturity category effective October 1, 2008. Held to maturity investments are
not measured at fair value on a recurring basis and as such do not fall within the scope
of ASC 820. See Note 2, Investments for a complete discussion regarding the Companys
RMBS portfolio.
The primary pricing sources for the Companys commercial loan and common stock portfolios
are reviewed for reasonableness, based on the Companys understanding of the respective
market. Prices may then be determined using valuation methodologies such as discounted
cash flow models, as well as matrix pricing analyses performed on non-binding quotes from
brokers or other market-makers. As of June 30, 2010, the Company did not utilize an
alternate valuation methodology for its commercial loan or common stock portfolios.
- 13 -
The following are the major categories of assets measured at fair value on a recurring
basis for the periods ended June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, using quoted prices in
active markets for identical assets (Level 1); significant other observable inputs (Level
2); and significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in
|
|
|
Level 2:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Level 3:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Total at
|
|
|
|
Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
$
|
18,484,492
|
|
|
$
|
822,808
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
19,307,300
|
|
Commercial loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
|
3,351,132
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
18,484,492
|
|
|
$
|
822,808
|
|
|
$
|
3,452,912
|
|
|
$
|
22,760,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in
|
|
|
Level 2:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Level 3:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Total at
|
|
|
|
Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
$
|
385,715,035
|
|
|
$
|
804,373
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
386,519,408
|
|
Commercial loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,001,118
|
|
|
|
5,001,118
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
385,715,035
|
|
|
$
|
804,373
|
|
|
$
|
5,119,086
|
|
|
$
|
391,638,494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 14 -
The investments classified as Level 3 in the above table consist of commercial loans
and common stock, for which the Company has determined that quoted market prices of
similar investments are not determinative of fair value. The following table presents
a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for all investments measured at
fair value using Level 3 inputs during the six months and three months ended June 30,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30, 2010
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Stocks
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Stocks
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
5,001,118
|
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
$
|
5,119,086
|
|
|
$
|
3,324,857
|
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
$
|
3,442,825
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gains or losses (realized/unrealized):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings (or changes in net
assets)
|
|
|
(32,748
|
)
|
|
|
37,772
|
|
|
|
5,024
|
|
|
|
(37,202
|
)
|
|
|
37,772
|
|
|
|
570
|
|
Included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases, sales, maturities, repayments,
redemptions and amortization
|
|
|
(1,617,238
|
)
|
|
|
(53,960
|
)
|
|
|
(1,671,198
|
)
|
|
|
63,477
|
|
|
|
(53,960
|
)
|
|
|
9,517
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers from Level 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers to Level 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
$
|
3,452,912
|
|
|
$
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
$
|
3,452,912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management believes that the use of the fair value option to record commercial loan
purchases is consistent with its objective for such investments. As such, the entire
commercial loan portfolio, consisting of three securities, of $3.4 million at June 30,
2010 was recorded at fair value. All loans are current with respect to interest payments.
The Company also has one small common stock position at June 30, 2010, which was recorded
at fair value.
(4) Income Taxes:
The Company files tax returns subject to the tax regulations of federal, state and local
tax authorities. A tax benefit taken in the tax return but not in the financial
statements is known as an unrecognized tax benefit. The Company had no unrecognized tax
benefits at either June 30, 2010 or June 30, 2009. The Companys policy is to record
interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits to income tax expense. The
Company did not incur any interest or penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits for
each of the six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009.
At June 30, 2010, state net operating losses that can be carried forward are $12,490,002.
The range of years in which the state NOL carryforwards, which are primarily in the State
of New York, can be carried forward against future tax liabilities is from 2010 to 2029.
At June 30, 2010, federal realized capital losses that can be carried forward are
$4,069,677. The range of years in which the federal capital loss carryforwards can be
carried forward is from 2010 to 2014. The estimate for federal capital losses may differ
from the actual amount ultimately filed in the Companys tax return.
As of June 30, 2010, the Company has recorded a valuation allowance of $4,960,384 with
respect to the uncertainty in the realization of capital loss carryforwards. The Company
considered various tax planning strategies to support the recoverability of existing
deferred income taxes for capital loss carryforwards. This included an analysis of the
timing and availability of unrealized positions in the Companys investment portfolio.
Included in changes in the valuation allowance were tax benefits of $6,359,026 for the six
months ended June 30, 2010, as a result of the reversal of the deferred tax valuation
allowance previously provided for capital losses that are now considered ordinary and a
reversal of the deferred tax valuation resulting from sales of US Treasury securities.
For the six months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded tax benefits of $3,269,735
as a result of the partial reversal of the deferred tax valuation previously provided for
capital losses. This resulted from capital gains achieved within the investment
portfolio. Management believes the deferred tax asset, net of the recorded valuation
allowance account, as of June 30, 2010 will more-likely-than-not be fully realized.
- 15 -
The provision for federal income (benefit) expense is different from that which would be
obtained by applying the statutory federal income tax rate to income before taxes. The
significant items causing this difference for the six months and three months ended June
30, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision computed at statutory rate
|
|
$
|
3,977
|
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,230
|
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,034
|
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,631
|
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt interest
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(1,216
|
)
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(627
|
)
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)
|
Dividends received deduction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proration
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(5,769
|
)
|
|
|
(50.8
|
)
|
|
|
(2,629
|
)
|
|
|
(12.7
|
)
|
|
|
(2,843
|
)
|
|
|
(48.9
|
)
|
|
|
(2,976
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
State taxes
|
|
|
(582
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
(623
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(269
|
)
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
|
|
(279
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
$
|
(2,367
|
)
|
|
|
(20.8)
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,974
|
|
|
|
14.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
(1,073
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5)
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,886
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5) Comprehensive Income
The Companys comparative comprehensive income is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
13,731
|
|
|
$
|
17,682
|
|
|
$
|
6,884
|
|
|
$
|
14,204
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of deferred taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized holding gains on securities, net of deferred tax expense
(benefit) of $(2,947), $3,110, $(786) and $1,376
|
|
|
9,070
|
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
6,810
|
|
|
|
2,556
|
|
Noncredit component of other than temporarily impaired securities (a):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held-to-maturity, net of deferred benefit of $0, $(14,053),
$0 and $(14,053)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,099
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,099
|
)
|
Accretion of noncredit portion of impairment on held-to-maturity, net
of deferred tax expense of $774, $354, $380 and $354
|
|
|
1,437
|
|
|
|
657
|
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
657
|
|
Less : reclassification adjustment for gains realized in net income,
net of tax (benefit) expense of $(2,672), $621, $(1,010) and $767
|
|
|
9,880
|
|
|
|
1,153
|
|
|
|
6,394
|
|
|
|
1,424
|
|
Less : reclassification adjustment for impairment losses recognized
in net income, net of tax benefit of $0, $(167), $0 and $(167)
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(311
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(311
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
927
|
|
|
|
(20,509
|
)
|
|
|
1,121
|
|
|
|
(23,999
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
14,658
|
|
|
$
|
(2,827
|
)
|
|
$
|
8,005
|
|
|
$
|
(9,795
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6) Common Stock Repurchase Plan:
Under the Common Stock Repurchase Plan, the Company may purchase up to $75 million of the
Companys issued and outstanding shares of common stock on the open market. There were no
repurchases of the Companys common stock during the first six months of 2010 or 2009.
- 16 -
Reconciliations of the numerators and denominators of the basic and diluted earnings per
share (EPS) computations for each of the periods reported herein are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
(Numerator)
|
|
|
(Denominator)
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
(Numerator)
|
|
|
(Denominator)
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except for per share data)
|
|
Basic EPS
|
|
$
|
13,731
|
|
|
|
8,486
|
|
|
$
|
1.62
|
|
|
$
|
17,682
|
|
|
|
8,418
|
|
|
$
|
2.10
|
|
Effect of dilutive
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity awards and
purchased options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
$
|
(.06
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
$
|
(.05
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS
|
|
$
|
13,731
|
|
|
|
8,786
|
|
|
$
|
1.56
|
|
|
$
|
17,682
|
|
|
|
8,608
|
|
|
$
|
2.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
(Numerator)
|
|
|
(Denominator)
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
(Numerator)
|
|
|
(Denominator)
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except for per share data)
|
|
Basic EPS
|
|
$
|
6,884
|
|
|
|
8,499
|
|
|
$
|
.81
|
|
|
$
|
14,204
|
|
|
|
8,424
|
|
|
$
|
1.69
|
|
Effect of dilutive
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity awards and
purchased options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
$
|
(.03
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
$
|
(.04
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS
|
|
$
|
6,884
|
|
|
|
8,824
|
|
|
$
|
.78
|
|
|
$
|
14,204
|
|
|
|
8,625
|
|
|
$
|
1.65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8) Incentive Compensation:
Share-based Plans:
The Company records compensation costs using the fair value of all share awards.
Compensation expense is recorded pro-rata over the vesting period of the award.
The Company has established three share-based incentive compensation plans (the Plans),
which are described below. Management believes that the Plans provide a means whereby the
Company may attract and retain persons of ability to exert their best efforts on behalf
of the Company. The Plans generally allow for the issuance of grants and exercises
through newly issued shares, treasury stock, or any combination thereof to officers, key
employees and directors who are employed by, or provide services to the Company. The
compensation cost that has been charged against income for the Plans was approximately
$1,915,000 and $1,051,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The approximate total income tax benefit accrued and recognized in the Companys
financial statements for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 related to
share-based compensation expenses was approximately $548,000 and $368,000, respectively.
- 17 -
1991 and 2002 Stock Option Plans
The 1991 and 2002 Stock Option Plans (the Option Plans) were adopted by the Companys
Board of Directors and approved by its shareholders in each of their respective years.
The plans provide for the grant of non-qualified options to purchase shares of the
Companys common stock. Both of the plans authorize the issuance of options to purchase
up to 500,000 shares of the Companys common stock at not less than 95 percent of the
fair market value at the date of grant. Option awards are exercisable over the period
specified in each contract and expire at a maximum term of ten years.
2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The NYMAGIC, INC. Amended and Restated 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the LTIP) was
adopted by the Companys Board of Directors and approved by its shareholders in 2004. The
LTIP authorizes the Board of Directors to grant non-qualified options to purchase shares
of Companys common stock, share appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted share
units, unrestricted share awards, deferred share units and performance awards. The LTIP
allows for the issuance of share-based awards up to the equivalent of 450,000 shares of
the Companys common stock at not less than 95 percent of the fair market value at the
date of grant. Share grants awarded under the LTIP are exercisable over the period
specified in each contract and expire at a maximum term of ten years. The LTIP was
amended and restated in 2008 to change the amount of share equivalents that may be issued
under it from 450,000 to 900,000.
Under the LTIP, the Company has granted restricted share units (RSUs), deferred share
units (DSUs) and performance share awards (performance shares), as well as
unrestricted common stock awards (i.e., vested and unencumbered shares). Grantees
generally have the option to defer the receipt of shares of common stock that would
otherwise be acquired upon vesting of restricted share units, which allows for
preferential tax treatment by the recipient of the award.
Stock Options
The fair value of each option award has been estimated as of the
respective grant-date using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model assuming
the following inputs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
41.5-67.3
|
%
|
Expected dividends
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
1.21-1.62
|
%
|
Expected term (in years)
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
3-4
|
|
Risk-free rate
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
1.34-1.43
|
%
|
The Company did not grant any stock option awards through the Option Plans during the six
months ended June 30, 2010. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted
for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 was $0 and $3.0 per share, respectively.
There was $52,528 of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested options awarded
pursuant to the Option Plans as of June 30, 2010, which will be recognized over the
remaining weighted-average vesting period of approximately 2.2 years. The total intrinsic
value of options exercised during the six months ended June 30, 2010 was approximately
$9,551. As of June 30, 2010, the aggregate intrinsic value was $1,161,709 for both
options outstanding and vested and exercisable.
The following table sets forth stock option activity for the Option Plans for the six
months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Price
|
|
Shares Under Option
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Outstanding, beginning of year
|
|
|
314,950
|
|
|
$
|
15.76
|
|
|
|
185,950
|
|
|
$
|
16.48
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
130,000
|
|
|
$
|
14.80
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(2,500
|
)
|
|
$
|
14.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(15,000
|
)
|
|
$
|
19.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, end of period
|
|
|
297,450
|
|
|
$
|
15.85
|
|
|
|
315,950
|
|
|
$
|
15.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable, end of period
|
|
|
284,950
|
|
|
$
|
15.69
|
|
|
|
170,950
|
|
|
$
|
15.97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 18 -
The weighted-average remaining contractual term as of June 30, 2010 for options
outstanding and options vested and exercisable was approximately 2.7 and 2.4 years,
respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009, the Company
received approximately $36,000 and $0, respectively, in cash for the exercise of stock
options granted under the Option Plans.
Restricted Share Units (RSUs) and Deferred Share Units (DSUs)
RSUs, as well as restricted shares, become vested and convertible into shares of common
stock when the restrictions applicable to them lapse. In accordance with ASC 718, the
fair value of nonvested shares is estimated on the date of grant based on the market
price of the Companys stock and is amortized to compensation expense on a straight-line
basis over the related vesting periods. As of June 30, 2010, there was $2,475,016 of
unrecognized compensation cost related to RSUs, which is expected to be recognized over a
remaining weighted-average vesting period of approximately two years. The total fair
value of RSUs vested and converted to shares of common stock during the six months ended
June 30, 2010 and 2009 was $323,690 and $238,064, respectively.
The Company has settled annual Board of Directors fees, in part, through the issuance of
DSUs. DSUs are vested immediately and are typically converted into shares of the
Companys common stock upon the departure of the grantee director. For the six months
ended June 30, 2010, fees of $641,200, have been settled by the grant of 36,831 DSUs.
The following table sets forth activity for the LTIP as it relates to RSUs and DSUs for
the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Value
|
|
RSUs and DSUs
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Nonvested, beginning of year
|
|
|
113,292
|
|
|
$
|
24.49
|
|
|
|
136,900
|
|
|
$
|
27.14
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
132,856
|
|
|
$
|
17.93
|
|
|
|
35,579
|
|
|
$
|
15.93
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(81,310
|
)
|
|
$
|
20.01
|
|
|
|
(38,400
|
)
|
|
$
|
25.98
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,000
|
)
|
|
$
|
40.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested, end of period
|
|
|
160,838
|
|
|
$
|
20.76
|
|
|
|
134,079
|
|
|
$
|
24.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrestricted shares of the Companys common stock have been granted pursuant to the
LTIP. 17,525 shares were granted to George Kallop, the former Chief Executive Officer and
director of the Company, during the six months ended June 30, 2010. The unrestricted
stock awards settled compensation costs of $300,028. There were no unrestricted stock
awards granted during the six months ended June 30, 2009.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
The Company established the Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the ESPP) in 2004. The ESPP
allows eligible employees of the Company and its designated affiliates to purchase,
through payroll deductions, shares of common stock of the Company. The ESPP is designed
to retain and motivate the employees of the Company and its designated affiliates by
encouraging them to acquire ownership in the Company on a tax-favored basis. The price
per common share sold under the ESPP is 85% (or more if the Board of Directors or the
committee administering the plan so provides) of the closing price of the Companys
shares on the New York Stock Exchange on the day the Common Stock is offered. The Company
has reserved 50,000 shares for issuance under the ESPP. There were no shares issued under
the ESPP during the six and three month periods ended June 30, 2010 and 2009.
(9) Nature of Business and Segment Information:
The Companys subsidiaries include three insurance companies and three insurance
agencies. These subsidiaries underwrite commercial insurance in three major lines of
business. The Company considers ocean marine, inland marine/fire and other liability as
appropriate segments for purposes of evaluating the Companys overall performance. A
final segment includes the aircraft business. The Company ceased writing any new policies
covering common carrier aircraft risks subsequent to June 30, 2002, although in
October 2009 it began to write policies on small, non-common carrier aircraft. The
Company evaluates revenues and
income or loss by the aforementioned segments. Revenues include premiums earned and
commission income. Income or loss includes premiums earned and commission income less the
sum of losses incurred and policy acquisition costs.
- 19 -
The financial information by segment is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
25,031
|
|
|
$
|
12,583
|
|
|
$
|
27,389
|
|
|
$
|
13,892
|
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
4,313
|
|
|
|
424
|
|
|
|
2,749
|
|
|
|
318
|
|
Other liability
|
|
|
59,897
|
|
|
|
2,658
|
|
|
|
49,244
|
|
|
|
7,146
|
|
Aircraft
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
|
(149
|
)
|
|
|
2,039
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
89,360
|
|
|
|
16,251
|
|
|
|
79,233
|
|
|
|
23,395
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
14,426
|
|
|
|
14,426
|
|
|
|
19,743
|
|
|
|
19,743
|
|
Net realized investment gains
|
|
|
7,208
|
|
|
|
7,208
|
|
|
|
1,774
|
|
|
|
1,774
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other-than-temporary impairments
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
Portion of loss recognized in OCI (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment loss recognized in earnings
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,856
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,478
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,371
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,364
|
)
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,975
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
110,700
|
|
|
$
|
13,731
|
|
|
$
|
100,337
|
|
|
$
|
17,682
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 20 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
12,646
|
|
|
$
|
4,819
|
|
|
$
|
14,101
|
|
|
$
|
6,869
|
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
2,298
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
1,567
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
Other liability
|
|
|
30,620
|
|
|
|
1,268
|
|
|
|
23,558
|
|
|
|
4,384
|
|
Aircraft
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
322
|
|
|
|
(123
|
)
|
|
|
1,777
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
45,655
|
|
|
|
6,315
|
|
|
|
39,103
|
|
|
|
13,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
|
7,381
|
|
|
|
7,381
|
|
|
|
13,191
|
|
|
|
13,191
|
|
Net realized investment gains
|
|
|
5,384
|
|
|
|
5,384
|
|
|
|
2,191
|
|
|
|
2,191
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other-than-temporary impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
Portion of loss recognized in OCI (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment loss recognized in earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
(478
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,584
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,434
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,687
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,684
|
)
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,886
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
58,422
|
|
|
$
|
6,884
|
|
|
$
|
54,067
|
|
|
$
|
14,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10) Related Party Transactions:
The Company entered into an investment management agreement with Mariner Partners, Inc.
(Mariner) effective October 1, 2002, which was amended and restated on December 6,
2002. Under the terms of this agreement, Mariner manages the Companys and its
subsidiaries, New York Marine And General Insurance Companys and Gotham Insurance
Companys investment portfolios. Fees to be paid to Mariner are based on a percentage of
the investment portfolios as follows: .20% of liquid assets, .30% of fixed maturity
investments and 1.25% of limited partnership (hedge fund) and equity security
investments. Another of the Companys subsidiaries, Southwest Marine And General
Insurance Company, entered into an investment management agreement, the substantive terms
of which are identical to those set forth above, with a subsidiary of Mariner, Mariner
Investment Group, Inc. (Mariner Group) effective March 1, 2007. William J.
Michaelcheck, a former director of the Company, is the Chairman and the beneficial owner
of a substantial number of shares of Mariner. George R. Trumbull, a director and the
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, A. George Kallop, formerly
President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of the Company, and William D. Shaw,
Jr., Vice Chairman and a director of the Company, are also associated with Mariner.
Investment fees incurred under the agreements with Mariner were $1,127,548 and $1,157,980
for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
As of June 30, 2010, the Company held approximately $180.3 million in limited partnership
and limited liability company interests in hedge funds, which are selected or directly
managed by Mariner.
On March 11, 2010 Mr. Kallop, the Companys former President and Chief Executive Officer,
announced his intention to retire from the Company, effective April 2, 2010. Mr. Kallop
informed the Board of Directors that he had intended to retire in any event on or before
December 31, 2010, but that the intervening severe illness of a family member had
accelerated his plans. In order to facilitate a smooth management transition from
Mr. Kallop to his successor, and to recognize his contributions to the Company, the
Company entered into an agreement with Mr. Kallop dated April 1, 2010 pursuant to which
he will make himself available for advice and counsel to his successor and the Chairman
of the Board of Directors through December 31, 2010 in consideration of $800,000, the
acceleration of the vesting of his outstanding unvested awards made under the Companys
Amended and Restated Long-Term Investment Plan, the waiver of a requirement in his
outstanding option award made in March of 2009 that he be employed by the Company on the
date of its exercise and the waiver of a requirement in his performance share award
effective January 1, 2009 that he be an employed by the Company in order to be eligible
for the grant of a standard performance share award in 2010. The Company recorded
compensation expense of approximately $482,000 and $216,000 for the six and three months ended June 30, 2010 as
a result of this agreement.
- 21 -
11) Legal Proceedings:
Two former pool members, Utica Mutual Insurance Company (Utica Mutual) and Arkwright
Mutual Insurance Company (Arkwright), which is currently part of the FM Global Group,
withdrew from the pools in 1994 and 1996, respectively, and retained the liability for
their effective pool participation for all loss reserves, including losses incurred but
not reported (IBNR) and unearned premium reserves attributable to policies effective
prior to their withdrawal from the pools. In December, 2007, MMO, which has been managing
the pools without compensation pursuant to a Restated Management Agreement entered into
with pool members in 1986, served notice on the pool members of its intent to terminate
the Restated Management Agreement, effective December 31, 2009. Two of the pool members,
Utica Mutual and Arkwright, rejected MMOs notice of intent to terminate, and MMO
initiated an arbitration against them, seeking an arbitral award, confirming its right to
terminate the Restated Management Agreement, or in the alternative, seeking a reformation
of the Restated Management Agreement. An arbitration hearing was held in January and
February, 2010, but an award is not expected until September 2010, at the earliest.
The Company is not aware of any facts that could result in any possible defaults by
either Arkwright or Utica Mutual with respect to their pool obligations, which might
impact liquidity or results of operations of the Company, but there can be no assurance
that such events will not occur.
In February 2010,
the Company paid approximately $33 million in gross claims with respect to
the WTC Attack. The ceded
recovery with respect
to this claim is approximately $22 million. While the claim payment
adversely impacted cash flows from
operations, it did not
have a substantial impact on results of operations or financial position.
Several reinsurers are currently
disputing payment of
the recovery to the Company based upon their denial of any obligation to pay
property settlements and
their interpretation
as to the number of occurrences as defined in the aircraft ceded reinsurance
treaties. The Company intends to
vigorously pursue such
balances through arbitrations, settlements or commutations, if necessary, but
an unfavorable resolution of
such collection
efforts could have a material adverse impact to our results of operations.
The Companys insurance subsidiaries are subject to disputes, including litigation and
arbitration, arising out of the ordinary course of business. The Companys estimates of
the costs of settling such matters are reflected in its reserves for losses and loss
expenses, and the Company does not believe that the ultimate outcome of such matters will
have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
12) Subsequent Events:
Proposed Merger
On July 15, 2010 the Company announced that it entered into a definitive agreement to be
acquired by ProSight Specialty Insurance Holdings, Inc. for $25.75 per share. ProSight
Specialty Insurance was founded by a group of senior executives from the property and
casualty industry and is backed by affiliates of TPG Capital and GS Capital Partners.
Under the terms of the agreement, NYMAGIC stockholders will receive $25.75 per share in
cash. The transaction will be 100% equity funded by ProSight Specialty Insurance.
Completion of the transaction, which is expected to occur in the fourth quarter of 2010,
is subject to the approval of NYMAGIC stockholders, the Company having a minimum tangible
book value of at least $205 million, customary closing conditions and regulatory
approvals.
A copy of the press release announcing the transaction was filed as an exhibit to the
Companys Current Report on From 8-K, filed with Securities and Exchange Commission on
July 15, 2010. A copy of the Agreement and Plan of Merger was filed as an exhibit to the
Companys Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 19, 2010.
Litigation Relating to the Proposed Merger
Between July 16 and July 26, 2010, four substantially similar putative class action
lawsuits were commenced by stockholders of NYMAGIC against the Company, its board of
directors and ProSight in the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of
New York challenging the proposed merger, captioned, Gross v. NYMAGIC, Inc., No.
650979/2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. filed July 16, 2010), Kahn v. Trumbull, No. 651033/2010 (N.Y.
Sup. Ct. filed July 20, 2010), Cambridge Retirement System v. NYMAGIC, Inc., No.
651058/2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. filed July 21, 2010), and Walker v. NYMAGIC, Inc., No.
109851/2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. filed July 26, 2010), respectively. The complaints, each of
which purports to be brought as a class action on behalf of all of the Companys
stockholders, excluding the defendants and their affiliates, allege that the
consideration that stockholders will receive in connection with the merger is inadequate
and that the Companys directors breached their fiduciary duties to stockholders in
negotiating and approving the merger agreement. The complaints further allege that the
Company and/or ProSight aided and abetted the alleged breaches by the Companys
directors. The complaints seek various forms of relief, including injunctive relief to
prevent consummation of the merger.
A motion to consolidate the actions and appoint a lead plaintiff and lead counsel has
been filed and is currently pending. The Company believes that the allegations in the
complaints are without merit and intends to defend the actions vigorously.
- 22 -
|
|
|
Item 2.
|
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
|
Description of Business
NYMAGIC, INC., a New York corporation (the Company or NYMAGIC), is a holding company
which owns and operates insurance companies, risk bearing entities and insurance
underwriters and managers.
Insurance Companies:
New York Marine And General Insurance Company (New York Marine)
Gotham Insurance Company (Gotham)
Southwest Marine And General Insurance Company (Southwest Marine)
Insurance Underwriters and Managers:
Mutual Marine Office, Inc. (MMO)
Pacific Mutual Marine Office, Inc. (PMMO)
Mutual Marine Office of the Midwest, Inc. (Midwest)
New York Marine and Gotham each currently holds a financial strength rating of A
(Excellent) and Southwest Marine currently holds a financial strength rating of A-
(Excellent) and an issuer credit rating of a- from A.M. Best Company. These are the
third and fourth highest of fifteen rating levels in A.M. Bests classification system.
The Companys insureds rely on ratings issued by rating agencies. Any adverse change in
the ratings assigned to New York Marine, Gotham or Southwest Marine may adversely impact
their ability to write premiums.
The Company specializes in underwriting ocean marine, inland marine/fire and other
liability insurance through insurance pools managed by the Companys insurance
underwriters and managers, MMO, PMMO and Midwest (collectively referred to as MMO). The
original members of the pools were insurance companies that were not affiliated with the
Company. Subsequently, New York Marine and Gotham joined the pools. Over the years, New
York Marine and Gotham steadily increased their participation in the pools, while the
unaffiliated insurance companies reduced their participation or withdrew from the pools
entirely. Since January 1, 1997, New York Marine and Gotham have been the only members of
the pools, and therefore we now write 100% of all of the business produced by the pools.
In prior years, the Company issued policies covering aircraft insurance; however, the
Company ceased writing any new policies covering aircraft risks as of June 30, 2002. The
Company decided to exit the commercial aviation insurance business, because it is highly
competitive, generated underwriting losses during the 1990s and is highly dependent on
the purchase of substantial amounts of reinsurance, which became increasingly expensive
after the events of September 11, 2001. In 2009, however, the Company began underwriting
policies covering single engine non-commercial aircraft.
In 2005, the Company formed Southwest Marine And General Insurance Company (Southwest
Marine), as a wholly owned subsidiary in the State of Arizona. Southwest Marine writes,
among other lines of insurance, excess and surplus lines in New York and surety business
in others states where it is licensed to write policies.
In 2008, the Company acquired a book of professional liability business oriented to
insurance brokers and agents and also formed MMO Agencies, which focuses on generating
additional premium growth through a network of general agents with binding authority
subject to underwriting criteria established and monitored by MMO.
Results of Operations
The Company reported net income for the second quarter ended June 30, 2010 of $6.9
million, or $.78 per diluted share, compared with $14.2 million, or $1.65 per diluted
share, for the second quarter of 2009. The decrease in results of operations for the
second quarter of 2010 when compared to the same period of 2009 was primarily
attributable to an increase in losses incurred and a decrease in investment income,
which was partially offset by an increase in net realized investment gains.
The Company reported net income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 of $13.7 million,
or $1.56 per diluted share, compared with $17.7 million, or $2.05 per diluted share, for
the same period in 2009. The decrease in results of operations for the six months ended
June 30, 2010 when compared to the same period of 2009 was primarily attributable to an
increase in incurred losses and a decrease in investment income, which was partially
offset by an increase in realized investment gains and tax benefits of $6.3 million, or
$.72 per diluted share, as a result of the partial reversal of the deferred tax
valuation allowance previously provided for capital losses.
Shareholders equity increased to $230.8 million as of June 30, 2010 compared to $216.0
million as of December 31, 2009. The increase was primarily attributable to net income
for the period which was partially offset by dividends declared.
- 23 -
The Companys gross premiums written, net premiums written and net premiums earned
increased by 7%, 19% and 13%, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2010, when
compared to the same period of 2009.
Premiums for each segment were as follows:
NYMAGIC Gross Premiums Written By Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
38,481
|
|
|
$
|
44,600
|
|
|
|
(14)
|
%
|
|
$
|
20,826
|
|
|
$
|
24,516
|
|
|
|
(15)
|
%
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
11,100
|
|
|
|
11,291
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
5,515
|
|
|
|
5,095
|
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
Other liability
|
|
|
76,768
|
|
|
|
62,039
|
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
29,652
|
|
|
|
20,739
|
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
126,349
|
|
|
|
117,930
|
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
55,993
|
|
|
|
50,350
|
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
Runoff lines (Aircraft)
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
247
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
126,711
|
|
|
$
|
117,939
|
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,240
|
|
|
$
|
50,276
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NYMAGIC Net Premiums Written By Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
27,215
|
|
|
$
|
29,937
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)%
|
|
$
|
13,949
|
|
|
$
|
15,719
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)%
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
6,146
|
|
|
|
3,776
|
|
|
|
63
|
%
|
|
|
3,367
|
|
|
|
1,869
|
|
|
|
80
|
%
|
Other liability
|
|
|
71,335
|
|
|
|
54,739
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
27,363
|
|
|
|
17,823
|
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
104,696
|
|
|
|
88,452
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
44,679
|
|
|
|
35,411
|
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
Runoff lines (Aircraft)
|
|
|
364
|
|
|
|
(149
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
(123
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
105,060
|
|
|
$
|
88,303
|
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
$
|
44,927
|
|
|
$
|
35,288
|
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NYMAGIC Net Premiums Earned By Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30,
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
24,952
|
|
|
$
|
27,425
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)%
|
|
$
|
12,567
|
|
|
$
|
14,137
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)%
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
4,313
|
|
|
|
2,749
|
|
|
|
57
|
%
|
|
|
2,298
|
|
|
|
1,567
|
|
|
|
47
|
%
|
Other liability
|
|
|
59,897
|
|
|
|
49,146
|
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
|
|
30,620
|
|
|
|
23,460
|
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
89,162
|
|
|
|
79,320
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
45,485
|
|
|
|
39,164
|
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
Runoff lines (Aircraft)
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(149
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
(123
|
)
|
|
NM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
89,281
|
|
|
$
|
79,171
|
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
|
$
|
45,576
|
|
|
$
|
39,041
|
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ocean marine gross premiums written for the six months ended June 30, 2010 decreased
by 14%, primarily reflecting reduced volume due to competitive markets as well as
slightly lower premium rates in the various marine classes. Ocean marine net premiums
written and net premiums earned for the six months ended June 30, 2010 decreased by 9%
when compared to the same period of 2009 and largely reflected the decline in gross
premiums written which was partially offset by lower excess of loss reinsurance costs
resulting from larger net loss retentions on business written in the current policy year.
- 24 -
Ocean marine gross premiums written for the three months ended June 30, 2010 decreased by
15%, primarily reflecting reduced production in the marine liability class as well as
slightly lower premium rates in the various marine classes. Ocean marine net premiums
written and net premiums earned for the three months ended June 30, 2010 decreased by 11%
when compared to the same period of 2009.
In 2009, the Company maintained a net loss retention of $5 million per risk in the ocean
marine line. In 2009, an additional amount up to $5 million, depending upon the gross
loss to the Company in excess of $5 million, was ceded to reinsurers. Effective January
1, 2010, the Company maintained its $5 million per risk net loss retention in the ocean
marine line that was in existence during 2009; however, the Company could retain an
additional amount up to $5 million depending upon the gross loss to the Company in excess
of $5 million. In addition, certain losses are limited to $2 million plus reinsurance
reinstatement costs. The quota share reinsurance protection for energy business remains
in effect for 2010 and energy business was also included within the ocean marine
reinsurance program.
Inland marine/fire gross premiums written decreased 2% and net premiums written increased
by 63% for the six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, when compared to the same
period of 2009. Net premiums earned for the six months ended June 30, 2010 increased by
57%. Gross premiums reflected mildly lower market rates in the fire class when compared
to the prior years comparable period, which were partially offset by increases in
production in surety business that were attributable to an additional agent appointment.
The increase in net premiums written and net premiums earned reflected larger net
retention levels of fire premiums when compared to the prior years first six months as
well as larger amounts of surety premiums which are written net of reinsurance.
Inland marine/fire gross premiums, net premiums written and net premiums earned
increased by 8%, 80% and 47% for the three months ended June 30, 2010 when compared to
the same period of 2009. Gross premiums written for the three months ended June 30, 2010
reflect increases in production largely relating to inland marine and surety risks that
were partially offset by declines in fire business largely resulting from mild rate
decreases. The increase in net premiums written and earned for the three months ended
June 30, 2010 reflected larger net retention levels of fire premiums when compared to
the prior years second quarter as well as larger amounts of surety premiums which are
written net of reinsurance.
Other liability gross premiums written and net premiums written increased 24% and 30%,
respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2010 when compared to the same period in
2009. Net premiums earned for the six months ended June 30, 2010 increased by 22% when
compared to the same period in 2009. The increases in premiums are primarily due to
production from MMO Agencies, which was formed in 2008 to write premiums through a
network of general agents with binding authority subject to underwriting criteria
established and monitored by the Company. In addition, commercial auto liability premiums
grew largely as a result of a new agent appointment which focuses on trucking business
written primarily in California. Partially offsetting the increases were declines in
premiums from excess workers compensation that resulted from lower production largely as
a consequence of reduced construction and commercial activities. Net premiums written
reflected the increase in gross written premiums as well as higher net retention levels
in the professional liability class.
Other liability gross premiums written and net premiums written increased 43% and 54%,
respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2010 when compared to the same period
in 2009. Net premiums earned for the three months ended June 30, 2010 increased by 31%
when compared to the same period in 2009. The increase in gross and net premiums written
is largely attributable to premiums from MMO Agencies, commercial auto premiums
resulting from a new agent appointment and production increases in professional
liability.
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred as a percentage of net premiums earned
(the loss ratio) was 63.5% for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to 44.4%
for the same period of 2009. The loss ratio was 58.8% for the six months ended June 30,
2010 as compared to 48.0% for the same period in 2009. Contributing to the higher loss
ratios in 2010 were increased severity losses in the ocean marine and inland marine/fire
lines of business, larger than expected loss ratios in the professional liability and
commercial auto classes as well as lower amounts of overall favorable reserve
development. Contributing to a higher ocean marine loss ratio in 2010 was $1.1 million
in losses occurring in the second quarter of 2010 from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig
explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. The other liability loss ratio increased due to larger
than expected loss ratios in the professional liability class due to a greater frequency
of losses as well as larger severity losses, which were partially offset by lower loss
estimates used for contractors liability business. The inland marine/fire segment
reflected a higher loss ratio in 2010 largely attributable to severity losses and lower
amounts of favorable loss reserve development.
- 25 -
The Company reported favorable development of prior year loss reserves of $3.7 million
and $1.0 million during the first six months and second quarter of 2010, respectively,
as a result of favorable reported loss trends arising from the ocean marine and
contractors liability lines of business in 2010, which was partially offset by adverse
development in the professional liability class. In addition, partially contributing to
the favorable loss development in 2010 was approximately $0.6 million and $0.3 million
in the six months and second quarter ended June 30, respectively, in favorable loss
development in the aviation line.
The Company reported favorable development of prior year loss reserves of $9.3 million
and $6.2 million during the first six months and second quarter of 2009, respectively,
as a result of favorable reported loss trends arising from the ocean marine and other
liability lines of business in 2009, including favorable resolution of large severity
claims and lower than expected reporting of claims. In addition, partially contributing
to the favorable loss development in 2009 was approximately $2.0 million and
$1.8 million in the six months and second quarter ended June 30, respectively, in
favorable loss development in the aviation line.
Policy acquisition costs as a percentage of net premiums earned (the acquisition cost
ratio) for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 were 22.8% and
21.8%, respectively. The acquisition cost ratios for the six months ended June 30,
2010 and 2009 were 23.1% and 22.5%, respectively. The slightly higher acquisition cost
ratio for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 was largely attributable to
increased writings within the other liability line of business which have higher
acquisition costs associated with them. The inland marine/fire segment also reported
higher acquisition cost ratios in 2010 when compared to the three months and six
months ended June 30, 2009 largely as a result of increased surety premiums and lower
reinsurance commissions in the fire class due to lower premium cessions to reinsurers.
General and administrative expenses increased by 11% and 12% for the second quarter and
six months ended June 30, 2010 when compared to the same period of 2009. Larger expenses
were incurred in 2010, primarily relating to compensation and related benefits, to
service the growth in the Companys business operations, merger expenses and arbitration
expenses including legal expenses from disputes arising from reinsurance receivables.
The Companys combined ratio (the loss ratio, the acquisition cost ratio and general
and administrative expenses divided by net premiums earned) was 111.7% for the three
months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to 93.0% for the same period in 2009. The
Companys combined ratio was 107.5% for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared
to 96.4% for the same period in 2009.
Interest expense of $3.4 million and $1.7 million for the six and three months ended
June 30, 2010 was comparable to the same periods of 2009.
Net investment income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was $14.4 million as
compared to $19.7 million for the same period of 2009. Net investment income in 2010
reflected lower investment returns in all investment income categories. Investment
income from fixed maturities, available for sale, was lower in 2010 primarily due to
lower investment balances carried when compared to the prior years first six months.
Investment income from commercial loans was greater in 2009 when compared to 2010
primarily due to unrealized appreciation in such investments. Limited partnership income
for the first six months of 2010 decreased from the same period of the prior year as a
result of lower returns amounting to 4.2% as compared to 7.6% for the same period of
2009. For the first six months of 2010, G-7 fund arbitrage strategies and our investment
in Tiptree Financial Partners LP reported lower returns than the prior years comparable
period. Partially offsetting this decline was an increase in returns from multi-strategy
funds.
Net investment income for the three months ended June 30, 2010 was $7.4 million as
compared to $13.2 million for the same period of 2009. Net investment income in 2010
reflected increases in income in the trading portfolio and decreases in all other
investment categories. Trading portfolio income of $3.4 million in 2010 resulted
primarily from realized gains associated with sales of US Treasury securities as
compared to $0.7 million for 2009, which resulted primarily from increases in the market
value of tax-exempt securities. Net investment income in 2010 reflected decreases in
income from limited partnerships and commercial loan portfolios. Income from commercial
loans of $0.2 million in 2010 compared with $1.8 million in 2009, which resulted
primarily from greater unrealized appreciation in the market for these types of
securities. Net investment income from limited partnerships of $8.0 million in 2009 was
greater than the $3.2 million in 2010 largely due to the performance of the Companys
investments in G-7 arbitrage strategies and Tiptree Financial Partners, LP. Limited
partnerships reported lower yields of 1.5% in 2010 as compared to 6.8% in 2009.
Investment income from fixed maturities, available for sale, was lower in 2010 primarily
due to lower investment balances carried when compared to the prior years second
quarter.
- 26 -
Investment income, net of investment fees, from each major category of investments was as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities held to maturity
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
Trading securities
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Commercial loans
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
Equity in earnings of limited partnerships
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment income
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
Investment expenses
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income
|
|
$
|
14.4
|
|
|
$
|
19.7
|
|
|
$
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
13.2
|
|
As of June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009, investments in limited partnerships amounted to
approximately $180.3 million and $120.2 million, respectively. The equity method of
accounting is used to account for the Companys limited partnership hedge fund
investments. Under the equity method, the Company records all changes in the underlying
value of the limited partnership hedge fund to results of operations.
As of June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009, investments in the trading and commercial loan
portfolios collectively amounted to approximately $3.4 million and $18.0 million,
respectively. Net investment income for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009
reflected approximately $3.6 million and $5.6 million, respectively, derived from
combined trading portfolio and commercial loan activities. These activities primarily
include the trading of US Treasury securities, commercial loans, municipal obligations
and preferred stocks. The Companys trading and commercial loan portfolios are marked to
market with the change recognized in net investment income during the current period. Any
realized gains or losses resulting from the sales of trading and commercial loan
investments are also recognized in net investment income.
The Companys investment income results may be volatile depending upon the level of
limited partnerships, commercial loans and trading portfolio investments held. If the
Company invests a greater percentage of its investment portfolio in limited partnership
hedge funds, and/or if the fair value of trading and/or commercial loan investments held
varies significantly during different periods, there may also be a greater volatility
associated with the Companys investment income.
Commission and other income decreased to $85,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2010
from $127,000 for the same period in the prior year.
Net realized investment gains were $5.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2010
as compared to net realized investment gains of $1.7 million for the same period in the
prior year. Net realized investment gains were $6.9 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2010 as compared to net realized gains of $1.3 million for the same period in
the prior year. Net realized investment gains in 2010 and 2009 primarily reflect gains
from the sales of US Treasury securities.
Write-downs from OTTI in the fair value of securities amounted to $0 and $0.3 million
for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively as compared to
$0.5 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2009. The OTTI recorded
for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was attributable to the Companys intention to
sell US Treasury securities that are not expected to recover their entire amortized cost
prior to sale. The OTTI recorded for the six months ended June 30, 2009 was attributable
to the Companys intention to sell certain municipal securities that were not expected
to recover their entire amortized cost prior to sale.
Total income tax (benefit) expense amounted to $(1.1) million and $1.9 million,
respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Total
income tax expense as a percentage of income before taxes was (18.5)% and 11.7% for the
three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Total income tax expense
amounted to $(2.4) million and $3.0 million, respectively, for the six months ended
June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Total income tax expense as a percentage of income
before taxes was (20.8)% and 14.4% for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009,
respectively. The lower percentages for the second quarter and six months ended June 30,
2010 were primarily attributable to tax benefits of $3.1 million, or $.35 per diluted
share, and $6.3 million, or $.72 per diluted share, respectively, as a result of the
partial reversal of the deferred tax valuation allowance previously provided for capital
losses. This compares to the partial reversal of the deferred tax valuation allowance
during the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2009 of $3.3 million, or $.38
per diluted share.
- 27 -
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Total cash and investments and receivable for securities disposed increased from
$679.9 million at December 31, 2009 to $683.6 million at June 30, 2010, principally as a
result of the collection of premiums and sales of appreciated investments which was
offset by an increase in paid losses mainly attributable to the payment of aviation
claims relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center.
The level of cash and short-term investments of $408.2 million at June 30, 2010 reflected
the Companys high liquidity position.
Cash flows used in operating activities were $10.4 million for the six months ended June
30, 2010 as compared to cash flows provided by operating activities of $43.7 million for
the same period in 2009. Trading portfolio and commercial loan activities of $1.7 million
favorably affected cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2010 while such
activities favorably affected cash flows by $13.9 million for the six months ended June
30, 2009. Trading portfolio activities include the purchase and sale of US Treasury
securities, preferred stocks and municipal bonds. Commercial loan activities include the
purchase and sale of
middle market loans made to commercial companies. As the Companys trading and commercial
loan portfolio balances may fluctuate significantly from period to period, cash flows
from operating activities may also be significantly impacted by such activities.
Contributing to a decrease in operating cash flows, other than trading and commercial
loan activities, during 2010 was an increase in paid losses mainly
attributable to the gross payment of $33 million of aviation claims relating to the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center. Approximately
$22 million was ceded to reinsurers, of which $11 million was outstanding as of June 30,
2010. Contributing to an increase in operating cash flows, other than trading and
commercial loan activities, during 2009 was the collection of
premiums and reinsurance recoverable balances.
Cash flows provided by investing activities were $342.3 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2010 as compared to cash flows used in investing activities of $61.7 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2009. The cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2010
were favorably impacted by the net sale of fixed maturities available for sale, which
primarily includes US Treasuries. The favorable cash flows were partially offset by
increased investments in limited partnerships. The cash flows for the six months ended
June 30, 2009 were adversely impacted by the net purchase of fixed maturities available
for sale investments.
Cash flows provided by financing activities were $0.6 million and $0.1 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. In 2010 and 2009, cash inflows
from the proceeds, including tax benefits, of stock issuances were partially offset by
cash dividends.
On March 10, 2010, the Company declared a dividend to shareholders of ten (10) cents per
share payable on April 7, 2010 to shareholders of record on March 31, 2010. On March 10,
2009, the Company declared a dividend to shareholders of four (4) cents per share payable
on April 7, 2009 to shareholders of record on March 31, 2009. On May 20, 2010,
the Company declared a dividend to shareholders of ten (10) cents per share payable on
July 8, 2010 to shareholders of record on June 30, 2010. On May 21, 2009, the Company
declared a dividend to shareholders of four (4) cents per share payable on July 7, 2009
to shareholders of record on June 30, 2009.
New York Marine and Gotham declared and paid ordinary dividends of $10.0 million and $0
to the Company during the first six months of 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Under the NYMAGIC, INC. Amended and Restated 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the LTIP),
the Company granted 132,856 restricted shares and deferred share units to officers and
Directors of the Company, 17,525 unrestricted shares of Common Stock to the President and
Chief Executive Officer and 36,831 deferred shares units to the Companys Directors
during the six months ended June 30, 2010. Under the LTIP, the Company granted 8,000
restricted share units, and up to 49,000 performance share units and 100,000 stock
options to the President and Chief Executive Officer during the six months ended June 30,
2009. The market price per share and option price per share on the grant date of the
stock option were $9.88 and $15.00 per share, respectively.
- 28 -
Under the Common Stock Repurchase Plan (the Plan), the Company may purchase up to $75
million of the Companys issued and outstanding shares of common stock on the open
market. During the second six months of 2010 and 2009, there were no repurchases of
common stock made under the Plan.
Premiums and other receivables, net increased to $33.5 million as of June 30, 2010 from
$24.8 million as of December 31, 2009, and the reserve for unearned premiums increased to
$107.2 million as of June 30, 2010 from $89.5 million as of December 31, 2009, primarily
as a result of excess workers compensation gross writings, which are substantially
written during the first half of the calendar year and increased writings from MMO
Agencies and commercial auto.
Deferred acquisition costs increased to $20.5 million as of June 30, 2010 from $16.4
million as of December 31, 2009 largely as a result of the increase in the unearned
premiums in the other liability segment.
Reinsurance receivables on paid balances, net as of June 30, 2010, increased to $26.5
million from $13.1 million as of December 31, 2009 and reinsurance receivables on unpaid
balances, net at June 30, 2010 decreased to $187.7 million from $205.1 million as of
December 31, 2009 largely as a result of the cession of approximately $22 million to
reinsurers that resulted from $33 million in gross aviation payments relating to the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center. Unpaid losses and loss
adjustment expenses as of June 30, 2010, decreased to $538.5 million from $555.5 million
as of December 31, 2009 primarily as a result of gross loss payments in the aviation
segment.
Other assets at June 30, 2010 increased to $9.2 million from $4.1 million as of December
31, 2009 largely as a result of an increase in federal income tax recoverable.
- 29 -
Investments
A summary of the Companys investment components at June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009
is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities held to maturity (adjusted
amortized cost):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
|
8.09
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
|
|
8.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities held to maturity
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
|
8.09
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,589,704
|
|
|
|
8.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities available for sale (fair value):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
|
$
|
18,484,492
|
|
|
|
2.78
|
%
|
|
$
|
385,715,035
|
|
|
|
57.09
|
%
|
Municipal obligations
|
|
|
822,808
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
%
|
|
|
804,373
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities available for sale
|
|
$
|
19,307,300
|
|
|
|
2.90
|
%
|
|
$
|
386,519,408
|
|
|
|
57.21
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities
|
|
$
|
73,091,811
|
|
|
|
10.99
|
%
|
|
$
|
443,109,112
|
|
|
|
65.58
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities available for sale (fair value):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities
|
|
$
|
101,780
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
117,968
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
408,196,542
|
|
|
|
61.38
|
%
|
|
$
|
75,544,627
|
|
|
|
11.18
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities, equity securities, cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
481,390,133
|
|
|
|
72.39
|
%
|
|
$
|
518,771,707
|
|
|
|
76.78
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans (fair value)
|
|
$
|
3,351,132
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,001,118
|
|
|
|
0.74
|
%
|
Limited partnership hedge funds (equity)
|
|
$
|
180,305,807
|
|
|
|
27.11
|
%
|
|
$
|
151,891,838
|
|
|
|
22.48
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment portfolio
|
|
$
|
665,047,072
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
675,664,663
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2010, 91.5% of the Companys fixed income and short-term investment
portfolios were considered investment grade by S&P. As of June 30, 2010, the Company
invested approximately $40.1 million in fixed maturities that were below investment
grade.
- 30 -
Details of the RMBS portfolio as of June 30, 2010, including publicly available
qualitative information, are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan to
|
|
|
FICO
|
|
|
D60+
|
|
|
Credit
|
|
|
S&P
|
|
|
Moodys
|
|
Security
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value %
|
|
|
Credit
|
|
|
Delinquency
|
|
|
Support
|
|
|
Rating
|
|
|
Rating
|
|
description
|
|
Issue date
|
|
|
amortized
cost (6)
|
|
|
Fair value
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
Score (2)
|
|
|
Rate (3)
|
|
|
Level (4)
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
AHMA 2006-3
|
|
|
7/2006
|
|
|
$
|
10,666,400
|
|
|
$
|
9,854,819
|
|
|
|
84.9
|
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
|
|
|
36.9
|
|
|
AA
|
|
Caa1
|
CWALT 2005-69
|
|
|
11/2005
|
|
|
|
6,865,539
|
|
|
|
6,414,370
|
|
|
|
81.1
|
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
51.6
|
|
|
|
47.7
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
Ba3
|
CWALT 2005-76
|
|
|
12/2005
|
|
|
|
6,752,551
|
|
|
|
6,659,662
|
|
|
|
81.6
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
54.9
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
B2
|
RALI 2005-QO3
|
|
|
10/2005
|
|
|
|
7,178,258
|
|
|
|
5,948,895
|
|
|
|
80.4
|
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
44.6
|
|
|
|
39.9
|
|
|
|
B-
|
|
|
B1
|
WaMu 2005-AR17
|
|
|
12/2005
|
|
|
|
5,844,676
|
|
|
|
6,684,510
|
|
|
|
73.0
|
|
|
|
715
|
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
49.5
|
|
|
AAA
|
|
A1
|
WaMu 2006-AR9
|
|
|
7/2006
|
|
|
|
8,048,422
|
|
|
|
8,550,953
|
|
|
|
74.2
|
|
|
|
731
|
|
|
|
34.0
|
|
|
|
22.9
|
|
|
|
B
|
|
|
Ba1
|
WaMu 2006-AR13
|
|
|
9/2006
|
|
|
|
8,428,665
|
|
|
|
9,213,927
|
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
33.5
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
CCC
|
|
B3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
53,784,511
|
|
|
$
|
53,327,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The dollar-weighted average amortized loan-to-original value of the underlying loans at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Average FICO at origination of remaining borrowers in the loan pool at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(3)
|
|
The percentage of the current outstanding principal balance that is more than 60 days delinquent as of July 25, 2010. This includes loans that are in foreclosure and real estate owned.
|
|
(4)
|
|
The current credit support provided by subordinate ranking tranches within the overall security structure at July 25, 2010.
|
|
(5)
|
|
Ratings as of July 25, 2010.
|
|
(6)
|
|
After OTTI recognized in OCI.
|
The Companys cash flow analysis for each of these securities attempts to estimate the
likelihood of any future impairment. While the Company does not believe there are any
OTTI currently, future estimates may change depending upon the actual performance
statistics reported for each security to the Company. This may result in future charges
based upon revised estimates for delinquency rates, severity rates or prepayment
patterns. These changes in estimates may be material. These securities are collateralized
by pools of Alt-A mortgages, and receive priority payments from these pools. The
Companys securities rank senior to subordinated tranches of debt collateralized by each
respective pool of mortgages. The Company has collected all applicable interest and
principal repayments on such securities to date. As of July 25, 2010, the levels of
subordination ranged from 22.9% to 49.5% of the total debt outstanding for each pool.
Delinquencies within the underlying mortgage pools ranged from 28.3% to 54.9% of total
amounts outstanding. For comparison purposes, as of July 25, 2009, delinquencies ranged
from 25.3% to 47.2%, while subordination levels ranged from 26.2% to 51.2%. Delinquency
rates are not the same as severity rates, or actual loss, but are an indication of the
potential for losses of some degree in future periods.
The fair value of each RMBS investment is based on the framework established in ASC 820
(See Note 3). Fair value is determined by estimating the price at which an asset might be
sold on the measurement date. There has been a considerable amount of turmoil in the U.S.
housing market since 2007, which has led to market declines in the Companys RMBS
securities. Because the pricing of these investments is complex and has many variables
affecting price including, projected delinquency rates, projected severity rates,
estimated loan to value ratios, vintage year, subordination levels, projected prepayment
speeds and expected rates of return required by prospective purchasers, the estimated
price of such securities will differ among brokers depending on these facts and
assumptions. While many of the inputs utilized in pricing are observable, many other
inputs are unobservable and will vary depending upon the broker. During periods of market
dislocation, such as current market conditions, it is increasingly difficult to value
such investments because trading becomes less frequent and/or market data becomes less
observable. As a result, valuations may include inputs and assumptions that are less
observable or require greater estimation and judgment as well as valuation methods that
are more complex. For example, assumptions regarding projected delinquency and severity
rates have become very pessimistic due to uncertainties associated with the residential
real estate markets. Additionally, there are only a limited number of prospective
purchasers of such securities and such purchasers generally demand high expected returns
in the current market. This has resulted in lower quotes from securities dealers, who
are, themselves, reluctant to position such securities because of financing
uncertainties. Accordingly, the dealer quotes used to establish fair value may not be
reflective of the expected future cash flows from a security and, therefore, not
reflective of its intrinsic value.
- 31 -
As of June 30, 2010, there was variance in RMBS securities prices from different pricing
sources. Management also determined that the few trades of RMBS were not consistent with
the prices received and analysis performed at quarter end. This confirmed managements
previously established view that the market is dislocated and illiquid. Accordingly, the
Company determined fair value using a matrix pricing analysis.
The Company used a weighted pricing matrix to determine fair value. The pricing matrix
was based on risk profile and qualitative and quantitative data for similar vintage RMBS
that had recently established prices. The securities were evaluated in each of the
following 9 categories: sector, collateral, current S&P rating, current credit support,
3 month conditional default rate, 3 month voluntary prepayment, 1 month loss severity,
60+ delinquencies, and FICO score. The price for each RMBS was based upon the prices of
those RMBS securities that had the similar underlying characteristics to the Companys
RMBS portfolio.
There are government sponsored programs that may affect the performance of the Companys
RMBS. The Company is uncertain as to the impact, if any, these programs will have on the
fair value of the Companys RMBS. The fair value of such securities at June 30, 2010 was
approximately $53.3 million.
The Companys estimates of fair value for financial assets and financial liabilities are
based on the framework established in ASC 820. The framework is based on the inputs used
in valuation and gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and
requires that observable inputs be used in the valuations when available. The disclosure
of fair value estimates in the ASC 820 hierarchy is based on whether the significant
inputs into the valuation are observable. In determining the level of the hierarchy in
which the estimate is disclosed, the highest priority is given to unadjusted quoted
prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs that reflect the
Companys significant market assumptions. The standard describes three levels of inputs
that may be used to measure fair value and categorize the assets and liabilities within
the hierarchy:
Level 1
Fair value is based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are
accessible to the Company for identical assets or liabilities. These prices generally
provide the most reliable evidence and are used to measure fair value whenever available.
Active markets are defined as having the following for the measured asset/liability: i)
many transactions, ii) current prices, iii) price quotes not varying substantially among
market makers, iv) narrow bid/ask spreads and v) most information publicly available.
The Companys Level 1 assets are comprised of U.S. Treasury securities, which are highly
liquid and traded in active exchange markets.
The Company uses the quoted market prices as fair value for assets classified as Level 1.
The Company receives quoted market prices from a third party, a nationally recognized
pricing service. Prices are obtained from available sources for market transactions
involving identical assets. For the majority of Level 1 investments, the Company receives
quoted market prices from an independent pricing service. The Company validates primary
source prices by back testing to trade data to confirm that the pricing services
significant inputs are observable. The Company also compares the prices received from the
third party service to other third party sources to validate the consistency of the
prices received on securities.
Level 2
Fair value is based on significant inputs, other than Level 1 inputs, that are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially
the full term of the asset through corroboration with observable market data. Level 2
inputs include quoted market prices in active markets for similar assets, non-binding
quotes in markets that are not active for identical or similar assets and other market
observable inputs (e.g., interest rates, yield curves, prepayment speeds, default rates
loss severities, etc.).
The Companys Level 2 assets include municipal debt obligations.
The Company generally obtains valuations from third party pricing services and/or
security dealers for identical or comparable assets or liabilities by obtaining
non-binding broker quotes (when pricing service information is not available) in order to
determine an estimate of fair value. The Company bases all of its estimates of fair value
for assets on the bid price as it represents what a third party market participant would
be willing to pay in an arms length transaction. Prices from pricing services are
validated by the Company through comparison to prices from corroborating sources and are
validated by back testing to trade data to confirm that the pricing services significant
inputs are observable. Under certain conditions, the Company may conclude the prices
received from independent third party pricing services or brokers are not reasonable or
reflective of market activity or that significant inputs are not observable, in which
case it may choose to over-ride the third-party pricing information or quotes received
and apply internally developed values to the related assets or liabilities. In such
cases, those valuations would be generally classified as Level 3. Generally, the Company
utilizes an independent pricing service to price its municipal debt obligations.
Currently, these securities are exhibiting low trade volume. The Company considers such
investments to be in the Level 2 category.
- 32 -
Level 3
Fair value is based on at least one or more significant unobservable inputs that
are supported by little or no market activity for the asset. These inputs reflect the
Companys understanding about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing
the asset or liability.
The Companys Level 3 assets include its RMBS, commercial loans and common stocks as they
are illiquid and trade in inactive markets. These markets are considered inactive as a
result of the low level of trades of such investments. The RMBS investments are not
considered within the Level 3 tabular disclosure, because they have been transferred to
held to maturity category effective October 1, 2008. Held to maturity investments are
not measured at fair value on a recurring basis and as such do not fall within the scope
of ASC 820. See Note 2, Investments for a complete discussion regarding the Companys
RMBS portfolio.
The primary pricing sources for the Companys commercial loan and common stock portfolios
are reviewed for reasonableness, based on the Companys understanding of the respective
market. Prices may then be determined using valuation methodologies such as discounted
cash flow models, as well as matrix pricing analyses performed on non-binding quotes from
brokers or other market-makers. As of June 30, 2010, the Company did not utilize an
alternate valuation methodology for its commercial loan or common stock portfolios.
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses for each segment were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Ocean marine
|
|
$
|
138,270
|
|
|
$
|
88,587
|
|
|
$
|
145,064
|
|
|
$
|
95,334
|
|
Inland marine/fire
|
|
|
21,747
|
|
|
|
7,861
|
|
|
|
19,254
|
|
|
|
6,580
|
|
Other liability
|
|
|
293,897
|
|
|
|
243,583
|
|
|
|
272,554
|
|
|
|
225,010
|
|
Aircraft
|
|
|
84,570
|
|
|
|
10,786
|
|
|
|
118,614
|
|
|
|
23,484
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
538,484
|
|
|
$
|
350,817
|
|
|
$
|
555,486
|
|
|
$
|
350,408
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our long tail business is primarily in ocean marine liability, aircraft and
non-marine liability insurance. These classes historically have extended periods of time
between the occurrence of an insurable event, reporting the claim to the Company and
final settlement. In such cases, we estimate reserves, with the possibility of making
several adjustments, because of emerging differences in actual versus expected loss
development, which may result from shock losses (large losses), changes in loss payout
patterns and material adjustments to case reserves due to adverse or favorable judicial
or arbitral results during this time period.
By contrast, other classes of insurance that we write, such as property, which includes
certain ocean marine classes (hull and cargo) and our inland marine/fire segment, and
claims-made non-marine liability, historically have had shorter periods of time between
the occurrence of an insurable event, reporting of the claim to the Company and final
settlement. The reserves for these classes are estimated as described above, but these
reserves are less likely to be readjusted, because it is not likely that they will have
significant differences resulting from expected loss development, shock or large losses,
changes in loss payout patterns and material adjustments to case reserves over their
short tails.
As the Company increases its production in its other liability lines of business, its
reported loss reserves from period to period may vary depending upon the long tail, short
tail and product mix within this segment. Our professional liability class, for example,
is written on a claims-made basis, but other sources of recent
production, such as excess workers compensation, are derived from liability classes
written on an occurrence basis. Therefore, the overall level of loss reserves reported by
the Company at the end of any reporting period may vary as a function of the level of
writings achieved in each of these classes.
In 2001, the Company recorded losses in its aircraft line of business as a result of the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the
hijacked airliner that crashed in Pennsylvania (collectively, the WTC Attack). At the
time, because of the amount of the potential liability to our insureds (United Airlines
and American Airlines) occasioned by the WTC Attack, we established reserves based upon
our estimate of our insureds policy limits for gross and net liability losses. In 2004
we determined that a reduction in the loss reserves relating to the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 on the Pentagon and the hijacked airliner that crashed in Pennsylvania
was warranted, because a significant number of claims that could have been made against
our insureds were waived by prospective claimants when they opted to participate in the
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 (the Fund), and the statutes of
limitations for wrongful death in New York and for bodily injury and property damage,
generally, had expired, the latter on September 11, 2004. Our analysis of claims against
our insureds, undertaken in conjunction with the industrys lead underwriters in London,
indicated that, because such a significant number of claims potentially emanating from
the attack on the Pentagon and the crash in Shanksville had been filed with the Fund, or
were time barred as a result of the expiration of relevant statutes of limitations, those
same claims would not be made against our insureds. Therefore, we concluded that our
insureds liability and our ultimate insured loss would be substantially reduced.
Consequently, we re-estimated our insureds potential liability for the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2001 on the Pentagon and the hijacked airliner that crashed in
Pennsylvania, and in 2004 we reduced our gross and net loss reserves by $16.3 million and
$8.3 million, respectively.
- 33 -
In light of the magnitude of the potential losses to our insureds resulting from the WTC
Attack, we did not reduce reserves for these losses until we had a high degree of
certainty that a substantial amount of these claims were waived by victims participation
in the Fund, or were time barred by the expiry of statutes of limitations, and we did not
reach that level of certainty until September 2004, when the last of the significant
statutes of limitations, that applicable to bodily injury and property damage, expired.
In 2006, the Company recorded adverse loss development of approximately $850,000 in the
aircraft line of business resulting primarily from losses assumed from the WTC Attack
which were partially offset by a reduction in reserves relating to the loss sustained at
the Pentagon after re-estimating the reserve based upon lower than expected settlements
of claims paid during the year.
In February 2010, the Company paid approximately $33 million in gross claims with respect
to the WTC Attack. The ceded recovery with respect to this claim is approximately $22
million. While the claim payment adversely impacted cash flows from operations, it did
not have a substantial impact on results of operations or financial position. Several
reinsurers are currently disputing payment of the recovery to the Company based upon
their denial of any obligation to pay property settlements and their interpretation as to
the number of occurrences as defined in the aircraft ceded reinsurance treaties. The
Company intends to vigorously pursue such balances through arbitrations, settlements or
commutations, if necessary, but an unfavorable resolution of such collection efforts
could have a material adverse impact to our results of operations.
The process of establishing reserves for claims involves uncertainties and requires the
use of informed estimates and judgments. Our estimates and judgments may be revised as
claims develop and as additional experience and other data become available and are
reviewed, as new or improved methodologies are developed or as current laws change. The
Company realized $3.7 million in favorable development for the six months ended June 30,
2010 largely as a result of favorable reported loss trends arising from the ocean marine
line of business although offset by adverse development in the professional liability
class. The Company realized $9.3 million in favorable development for the six months
ended June 30, 2009 as a result of favorable reported loss trends arising from the ocean
marine and other liability lines of business as well as recoveries in the aviation line
of business. Other than specifically disclosed herein, there were no significant changes
in assumptions made in the evaluation of loss reserves during 2010.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangement
The Company has no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Critical Accounting Policies
The Company discloses significant accounting policies in the notes to its financial
statements. Management considers certain accounting policies to be critical with respect
to the understanding of the Companys financial statements. Such policies require
significant management judgment and the resulting estimates have a material effect on
reported results and will vary to the extent that future events affect such estimates and
cause them to differ from the estimates provided currently. These critical accounting
policies include unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses, allowance for doubtful
accounts, impairment of investments, limited partnerships and trading portfolios,
reinstatement reinsurance premiums and stock compensation.
The Company maintains reserves for the future payment of losses and loss adjustment
expenses with respect to both case (reported) and IBNR (incurred but not reported) losses
under insurance policies issued by the Company. IBNR losses are those losses, based upon
historical experience, industry loss data and underwriter expectations, that the Company
estimates will be reported under these policies. Case loss reserves are determined by
evaluating reported claims on the basis of the type of loss involved, knowledge of the
circumstances surrounding the claim and the policy provisions relating to the type of
loss. Case reserves can be difficult to estimate depending upon the class of business,
claim complexity, judicial interpretations and legislative changes that affect the
estimation process. Case reserves are reviewed and monitored on a regular basis, which
may result in changes (favorable or unfavorable) to the initial estimate until the claim
is ultimately paid and settled. Unpaid losses with respect to asbestos/environmental
risks are difficult for management to estimate and require considerable judgment due to
the uncertainty regarding the significant issues surrounding such claims. Unpaid losses
with respect to catastrophe losses, such as hurricanes Katrina and Rita that occurred in
2005 and hurricanes Ike and Gustav in 2008, are also difficult to estimate due to the
high severity of the risks we insure. Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses amounted
to $538.5 million and $555.5 million at June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009,
respectively. Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance amounted to
$350.8 million and $350.4 million at June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
Management continually reviews and updates the estimates for unpaid losses, and any
changes resulting therefrom are reflected in operating results currently. The potential
for future adverse or favorable loss development is highly uncertain and subject to a
variety of factors including, but not limited to, court decisions, legislative actions
and inflation.
- 34 -
The allowance for doubtful accounts is based on managements review of amounts due from
insolvent or financially impaired companies. Allowances are estimated for both premium
receivables and reinsurance receivables. Management continually reviews and updates such
estimates for any changes in the financial status of companies. The allowance for
doubtful accounts for both premiums and reinsurance receivables amounted to $17.2 million
and $17.6 million as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
Impairment of investments, included in realized investment gains or losses, results from
declines in the fair value of investments which are considered by management to be
other-than-temporary.
Impairment of investments, included in realized investment gains or losses, results from
declines in the fair value of investments which are considered by management to be
other-than-temporary. Management reviews investments for impairment based upon specific
criteria that include the duration and extent of declines in fair value of the security
below its cost or amortized cost. The Company performs a qualitative and quantitative
review of all securities in a loss position in order to determine if any impairment is
considered to be other-than-temporary. The Company also reviews all securities with any
rating agency declines during the reporting period. This review includes considering the
effect of rising interest rates and the Companys intent and ability to hold impaired
securities in the foreseeable future to recoup any losses. In addition to subjecting its
securities to the objective tests of percent declines in fair value and downgrades by
major rating agencies, when it determines whether declines in the fair value of its
securities are other-than-temporary, the Company also considers the facts and
circumstances that may have caused the declines in the value of such securities. As to
any specific security, it may consider general market conditions, changes in interest
rates, adverse changes in the regulatory environment of the issuer, the duration for
which the Company expects to hold the security and the length of any forecasted recovery.
Effective April 1, 2009, under ASC 320 and ASC 958,
Recognition and Presentation of
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments
impairment is considered to be other than temporary if
an entity (1) intends to sell the security, (2) more likely than not will be required to
sell the security before recovering its amortized cost basis, or (3) does not expect to
recover the securitys entire amortized cost basis. The OTTI of $0.3 million and $0.5
million recognized for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009,
respectively, resulted from the Companys intention to sell certain US Treasury and other
securities under circumstances in which those securities are not expected to recover
their entire amortized cost prior to sale. Credit impairment occurs under ASC 320 if the
present value of cash flows expected to be collected from the debt security is less than
the amortized cost basis of the security. There were no credit impairments recorded
during the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Gross unrealized gains
and losses on fixed maturity investments available for sale amounted to approximately
$0.4 million and $0, respectively, at June 30, 2010. Gross unrealized gains and losses on
fixed maturity investments available for sale amounted to approximately $3.9 million and
$(0.7) million, respectively, at December 31, 2009. The Company believes the unrealized
losses are temporary and result from changes in market conditions, including interest
rates or sector spreads.
The Company has investments in residential RMBS amounting to $53.8 million (amortized
value) at June 30, 2010. These securities are classified as held to maturity after the
Company transferred these holdings from the available for sale portfolio effective
October 1, 2008. Upon acquisition of the RMBS portfolio and prior to October 1, 2008, the
Company was uncertain as to the duration for which it would hold the RMBS portfolio and
appropriately classified such securities as available for sale.
The Company utilizes the equity method of accounting to account for its limited
partnership hedge fund investments. Under the equity method, the Company records all
changes in the underlying value of the limited partnership to net investment income in
results of operations. Net investment income derived from investments in limited
partnerships amounted to $7.9 million and $9.2 million for the six months ended June 30,
2010 and 2009, respectively. See Item 3 Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About
Market Risk with respect to market risks associated with investments in limited
partnership hedge funds.
The Company maintained a commercial loan portfolio at June 30, 2010 consisting of
commercial middle market loans. As a result of utilizing the fair value election under
ASC 825 on these investments, they are marked to market with the change recognized in net
investment income during the current period. Any realized gains or losses resulting from
the sales of such securities are also recognized in net investment income. The Company
recorded $0.2 million and $1.8 million in commercial loan portfolio income before
expenses for each of the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. See
Item 3 Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk with respect to
market risks associated with investments in illiquid investments.
Reinsurance reinstatement premiums are recorded, as a result of losses incurred by the
Company, in accordance with the provisions of our reinsurance contracts. Upon the
occurrence of a large severity or catastrophe loss, the Company may be obligated to pay
additional reinstatement premiums under its excess of loss reinsurance treaties up to the
amount of the original premium paid under such treaties. Reinsurance reinstatement
premiums incurred for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were $0 and
$0.2 million, respectively.
- 35 -
The Company records compensation costs at the fair value of all share options, restricted shares units, deferred share units and performance share units over their related vesting
period or service period. Total stock compensation cost recognized in earnings for all
share-based incentive compensation awards was approximately $1.9 million and $1.1 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Effective January 1, 2008, the Company adopted ASC 820, which establishes a consistent
framework for measuring fair value. The framework is based on the inputs used in
valuation and gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and requires
that observable inputs be used in the valuations when available. The disclosure of fair
value estimates in the ASC 820 hierarchy is based on whether the significant inputs into
the valuation are observable. For an updated discussion of the application of estimates
and assumptions around the valuation of investments, see Fair value measurements.
|
|
|
Item 3.
|
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
The investment portfolio has exposure to market risks, which include the effect on the
investment portfolio of adverse changes in interest rates, credit quality, hedge fund
values, and illiquid securities including commercial loans and residential
mortgage-backed securities. Interest rate risk includes the changes in the fair value of
fixed maturities based upon changes in interest rates. Credit quality risk includes the
risk of default by issuers of debt securities. Hedge fund risk includes the potential
loss from the diminution in the value of the underlying investment of the hedge fund.
Illiquid securities risk includes exposure to the private placement market including its
lack of liquidity and volatility in changes in market prices. The only significant change
to the Companys exposure to market risks during the six months ended June 30, 2010 as
compared to those disclosed in the Companys financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2009 related to the level of investments in limited partnerships. The
investment in limited partnerships amounted to $180.3 million and $152.0 million as of
June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
At June 30, 2010, the Company held $3.4 million of commercial loans, which consisted of
loans to middle market companies. The Company has elected to account for such debt
instruments utilizing the fair value election under SFAS 159. Accordingly, the changes in
the fair value of these debt instruments are recorded in investment income. The markets
for these types of investments can be illiquid and, therefore, the price obtained from
dealers on these investments is subject to change, depending upon the underlying market
conditions of these investments, including the potential for downgrades or defaults on
the underlying collateral of the investment. The Company seeks to mitigate market risk
associated with commercial loans by maintaining a small portion of its investment
portfolio in commercial loans. As such, less than 1% of the Companys investment
portfolio is maintained in such investments at June 30, 2010.
Hedge fund risk includes the potential loss from the diminution in the value of the
underlying investment of the hedge fund. Hedge fund investments are subject to various
economic and market risks. The risks associated with hedge fund investments may be
substantially greater than the risks associated with fixed income
investments. Consequently, our hedge fund portfolio may be more volatile, and the risk of
loss greater, than that associated with fixed income investments. In accordance with the
investment policy for each of the Companys New York insurance company subsidiaries,
hedge fund investments are limited to the greater of 30% of invested assets or 50% of
policyholders surplus. The Companys Arizona insurance subsidiary does not invest in
hedge funds.
The Company also seeks to mitigate market risk associated with its investments in hedge
funds by maintaining a diversified portfolio of hedge fund investments. Diversification
is achieved through the use of many investment managers employing a variety of different
investment strategies in determining the underlying characteristics of their hedge funds.
The Company is dependent upon these managers to obtain market prices for the underlying
investments of the hedge funds. Some of these investments may be difficult to value and
actual values may differ from reported amounts. The hedge funds in which we invest
usually impose limitations on the timing of withdrawals from the hedge funds (most are
within 90 days), and may affect our liquidity.
- 36 -
|
|
|
Item 4.
|
|
Controls and Procedures
|
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
An evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended) as of the end of the period covered by this report was made under
the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our President and
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. Based upon this evaluation, our
President and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures (a) are effective to ensure that information required
to be disclosed by us in reports filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act is
timely recorded, processed, summarized and reported and (b) include, without limitation,
controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by
us in reports filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our President and Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Changes in Internal Controls
There have been no significant changes in our internal control over financial reporting
(as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act) that occurred during the
period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
- 37 -
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 1.
|
|
Legal Proceedings
|
None.
There were no material changes to the
risk factors disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, except as noted below.
The Failure to Complete the
Pending Sale of the Company Could have a Materially Adverse Impact.
On July 15, 2010, we entered into
a definitive agreement to be acquired by ProSight Specialty Insurance Holdings,
Inc. (the “Merger”). ProSight Specialty Insurance Holdings, Inc.
(“ProSight”) was founded by a group of senior executives from the
property and casualty industry and is backed by affiliates of TPG Capital and
GS Capital Partners. Consummation of the Merger is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, including, but not limited to,
the approval of the Company’s shareholders and the obtainment of certain
required regulatory approvals. There can be no assurance that the
Company’s shareholders will approve the Merger or that the other
conditions to the completion of the Merger will be satisfied. If the Merger is
not completed for any reason, the price of the Company’s common stock
will likely decline to the extent that the market price of the common stock
reflects market assumptions that the Merger will be completed. Additionally,
the Company is subject to additional risks in connection with the Merger,
including: (1) the occurrence of an event, change or circumstance that
could give rise to the payment of a termination fee to ProSight pursuant to the
terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, (2) the outcome of any legal
proceedings that have been or may be instituted against the Company and others
relating to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger,
(3) the failure of the Merger to close for any reason, (4) the
restrictions imposed on the Company’s business, properties and operations
pursuant to the affirmative and negative covenants set forth in the Agreement
and Plan of Merger and the potential impact of such covenants on the
Company’s business, (5) the risk that the proposed transaction will
divert management’s attention resulting in a potential disruption of the
Company’s current business plan, (6) potential difficulties in
employee retention arising from the Merger, (7) the effect of the
announcement of the Merger on the Company’s business relationships,
operating results and business generally and (8) the amount of fees,
expenses and charges incurred by the Company in connection with the Merger.
|
|
|
Item 2.
|
|
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
None.
|
|
|
Item 3.
|
|
Defaults Upon Senior Securities
|
None.
|
|
|
Item 4.
|
|
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
The Company held its 2010 annual meeting of shareholders on May 20, 2010. The following matters
were voted upon by the Companys shareholders:
1) Directors. The following persons were elected as Directors of the Board of Directors, each to
hold office until the next annual meeting of shareholders to be held in 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total votes
|
|
|
Total votes
|
|
|
|
for each
|
|
|
withheld for
|
|
|
|
director
|
|
|
each director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glenn Angiolillo
|
|
|
5,406,748
|
|
|
|
182,009
|
|
John T. Baily
|
|
|
5,380,529
|
|
|
|
208,228
|
|
Dennis H. Ferro
|
|
|
5,413,937
|
|
|
|
174,820
|
|
William D. Shaw Jr.
|
|
|
5,387,129
|
|
|
|
201,628
|
|
Robert G. Simses
|
|
|
5,393,418
|
|
|
|
195,339
|
|
George R. Trumbull, III
|
|
|
5,404,637
|
|
|
|
184,120
|
|
David W. Young
|
|
|
5,413,837
|
|
|
|
174,920
|
|
2) Ratification of Independent Public Accountants. KPMG LLP were ratified as the Companys
independent public accountants for the Companys fiscal year ending December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
FOR
|
|
AGAINST
|
|
ABSTAIN
|
|
|
7,626,645
|
|
24,187
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
Item 5.
|
|
Other Information
|
None.
- 38 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
Charter of NYMAGIC, INC.
(filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on
December 16, 2003 (File No.
1-11238) and incorporated
herein by reference).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
Agreement, effective April 2,
2010, between the Company and
A. George Kallop (filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys
Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on April 7, 2010 (File
No. 1-11238) and incorporated
herein by reference).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
Employment Agreement,
effective January 1, 2010,
between the Company and
Thomas J. Iacopelli (filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys
Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on April 1, 2010 (File
No. 1-11238) and incorporated
herein by reference).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*31.1
|
|
|
Certification of George R.
Trumbull, Chief Executive
Officer, as adopted pursuant
to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*31.2
|
|
|
Certification of Thomas J.
Iacopelli, Chief Financial
Officer, as adopted pursuant
to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*32.1
|
|
|
Certification of George R.
Trumbull, Chief Executive
Officer, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*32.2
|
|
|
Certification of Thomas J.
Iacopelli, Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly
authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NYMAGIC, INC.
(Registrant)
|
|
Date: August 9, 2010
|
/s/ George R. Trumbull
|
|
|
George R. Trumbull
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2010
|
/s/ Thomas J. Iacopelli
|
|
|
Thomas J. Iacopelli
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
- 39 -
Nymagic (NYSE:NYM)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 12월(12) 2024 으로 1월(1) 2025
Nymagic (NYSE:NYM)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 1월(1) 2024 으로 1월(1) 2025