Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(5)
Registration No. 333-143244

PROSPECTUS SUPPLEMENT
(To Prospectus Dated June 12, 2007)

 

 

6,250,000 Shares

 

Common Stock

 

 

 

 

We are offering 5,500,000 shares of common stock and our chairman, Merton J. Segal, his spouse Beverly Segal and a trust established for her benefit (collectively, “Mr. Segal”) are collectively offering 750,000 shares of common stock. We will not receive any proceeds from sales of our common stock by Mr. Segal.

 

Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MIG.” On July 18, 2007, the closing price of our common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange was $9.65 per share of common stock.

 

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the information under the heading “Risk Factors” beginning on page S-9 of this prospectus supplement and page 3 of the accompanying prospectus before buying shares of our common stock.

 

 

 

 

To the extent that the underwriters sell more than 6,250,000 shares of common stock, we have granted the underwriters an option for a period of 30 days to purchase up to 937,500 additional shares of our common stock at the public offering price, less the underwriting discount.

 

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

 

We expect the shares of our common stock will be ready for delivery to purchasers on or about July 24, 2007.

 

 

 

 

 

The date of this prospectus supplement is July 19, 2007.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Prospectus Supplement

 

 

Prospectus

 

 

This prospectus supplement is a supplement to the accompanying prospectus that is also a part of this document. This prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus are part of a Registration Statement on Form S-3 that we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, on May 24, 2007 using a “shelf” registration process (the “Shelf Registration Statement”). In this prospectus supplement, we provide you with specific information about the terms of this offering and certain other information. Both this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus include important information about us, our common stock and other information you should know before investing in our common stock. This prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus also incorporate by reference important business and financial information about us that is not included in or delivered with these documents. You should read both this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus, as well as the additional information described under the heading “Where You Can Find More Information” below and on page 3 of the accompanying prospectus before investing in our common stock. This prospectus supplement adds, updates and changes information contained in the accompanying prospectus and the information incorporated by reference. To the extent that any statement that we make or incorporate by reference in this prospectus supplement is inconsistent with the statements made in the accompanying prospectus or the information incorporated by reference herein or therein, the statements made or incorporated by reference in the accompanying prospectus are deemed modified or superseded by the statements made or incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement.

 

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. We have not authorized any other person to provide you with information that is different from that contained in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. If anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. We are offering to sell and seeking offers to buy these securities only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are permitted. You should assume the information contained in this prospectus and any prospectus supplement is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus or such prospectus supplement relating to the offering, respectively, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus supplement or the accompanying prospectus or any sale of common stock. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since that date.

 

We have filed the Shelf Registration Statement with the SEC with respect to the common stock offered for sale by us pursuant to this prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus. This prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus, filed as part of the Shelf Registration Statement, do not contain all of the information set forth in the Shelf Registration Statement and its exhibits and schedules, portions of which have been omitted as permitted by the rules and regulations of the SEC. For further information about us and the common stock, we refer you to the Shelf Registration Statement and to its exhibits and schedules. Statements in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus about the contents of any contract, agreement or other document are not necessarily complete and, in each instance, we refer you to the copy of such contract, agreement or document filed or incorporated by reference as an exhibit to the Shelf Registration Statement, with each such statement being qualified in all respects by reference to the document to which it refers. Anyone may inspect the Shelf Registration Statement and its exhibits and schedules without charge at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC in Washington, D.C. (100 F Street NE, Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549). Copies of such materials can be obtained from the SEC’s public reference section at prescribed rates. You may obtain information on the operation of the public reference rooms by calling the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 or on the SEC website located at http://www.sec.gov.

 

Information about us is also available at our website at http://www.meadowbrook.com. However, the information on our website is not a part of this prospectus supplement or the accompanying prospectus.

 

The SEC allows us to “incorporate by reference” the information we file with them. This means that we may disclose information to you by referring you to other documents we have filed with the SEC. The information that we incorporate by reference is an important part of this prospectus supplement and information that we later file with the SEC will automatically update and, where applicable, supersede the information in this prospectus supplement or incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement.

 

We incorporate by reference in this prospectus supplement all the documents listed below and any filings Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. makes with the SEC under Sections 13(a), 13(c), 14 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act after the date of this prospectus supplement and before all the shares of common stock offered by this prospectus supplement have been sold or de-registered:

 

 

You may send a written request or call us to obtain without charge a copy of the documents incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement. We will not send exhibits to these documents unless we specifically incorporated the exhibits by reference in this prospectus supplement. Make your request by calling or writing to:

 

Holly Moltane

Director of External Financial Reporting

Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc.

26255 American Drive

Southfield, Michigan 48034-5178

(248) 204-8590

hmoltane@meadowbrook.com

 

PROSPECTUS SUPPLEMENT SUMMARY

(1)		Figures are for the year ending December 31, 2006
(2)		Under GAAP, intercompany fees are fees paid by our insurance company subsidiaries for risk management services and are eliminated upon consolidation

																						As of and for the
																						Quarters Ending
		As of and for the Years Ending December 31,																				March 31,
		2002				2003				2004				2005				2006				2006				2007
		(In thousands, except per share and ratio data)
Income Statement Data:
Gross Written Premiums		$	183,637			$	253,280			$	313,493			$	332,209			$	330,872			$	89,010			$	89,504
Gross Commissions and Fees			63,180	(1)			81,101	(1)			88,585	(1)(2)			86,670				91,167				23,564				23,998
Revenues
Net Earned Premiums			145,383				151,205				214,493				249,959				254,920				63,124				65,204
Net Commissions and Fees			37,581	(1)			45,291	(1)			40,535	(1)(2)			35,916				41,172				11,289				11,551
Net Investment Income			13,958				13,484				14,911				17,975				22,075				5,239				6,156
Total Revenues			197,787				210,803				270,278				304,017				318,236				79,645				82,905
Total Expenses			195,240				194,525				249,904				278,351				286,731				71,182				72,846
Net Income			1,650				10,099				14,061				17,910				22,034				5,625				6,923
Earnings per Share (Diluted)		$	0.08			$	0.35			$	0.48			$	0.60			$	0.75			$	0.19			$	0.23
Balance Sheet Data:
Total Assets			674,839				692,266				801,696				901,344				969,000				925,518				1,009,352
Shareholders’ Equity			147,395				155,113				167,510				177,365				201,693				180,947				207,379
Book Value per Share		$	4.98			$	5.34			$	5.76			$	6.19			$	6.93			$	6.28			$	7.02
Other Data:
Combined Ratio			108.6	%			104.4	%			101.4	%			98.7	%			96.8	%			96.2	%			96.3	%
Return on Beginning Equity			2.1	%			6.9	%			9.1	%			10.7	%			12.4	%			12.7	%			13.7	%

(1)		Both gross and net commissions and fees include fee revenue associated with two limited duration contracts with the state of Missouri. For the years 2002, 2003, and 2004, gross and net commissions and fees included $748,000, $14.5 million, and $8.3 million, respectively, in fee revenue related to these contracts.
(2)		In the third quarter of 2004, we accelerated the recognition of $3.5 million in revenue from the two limited duration contracts with the state of Missouri.

	•	Our targeted specialty programs generate insurance premiums and investment income. We focus on specific underwriting niches in smaller average premium accounts, which tend to be less subject to price competition.
	•	Revenue generated from managed service fees allows us to provide our back office insurance service expertise to self-insured groups, public entity pools, trusts and other insurance companies, thus leveraging our resources over a larger customer base.
	•	Agency commissions received from non-affiliated insurance carriers provide revenues which are not tied to the same geographic markets or class of business as those in our risk taking programs and create greater diversification.

	•	Perform the vast majority of our own underwriting — which produces more consistent data and a better understanding of the risks we insure
	•	Manage substantially all of our own claims — which keeps us in tune with how losses develop and produces greater reliability and predictability in the reserving process, and an overall better result
	•	Perform regular audits of our branch offices and program partners — which allows us to ensure consistency in the application of our underwriting and claims handling standards
	•	Maintain all data on our information systems — which gives us more timely access to information in order to identify strengths and weaknesses in our programs and recognize and respond quickly to changes in the market
	•	Perform monthly reviews of premium and losses on all programs — which enables us to regularly evaluate pricing adequacy, reserve position and adherence to our underwriting guidelines
	•	Execute a multi-disciplinary due diligence process — which allows representatives from all significant disciplines within our company (e.g., actuarial, underwriting, claims, legal, finance and systems) to ensure that new programs are designed to meet our return on equity goals and are adequately structured to promote success
	•	Utilize a web-based processing system — which makes it easier for producers to do business with us and helps reduce costs and improve control over underwriting

	•	If our estimates of reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses are not adequate, we will have to increase our reserves, which would result in reductions in net income, retained earnings, statutory surplus and liquidity.
	•	If our financial strength ratings are reduced, we may be adversely impacted.
	•	Market conditions may cause our reinsurance to be more costly or unavailable, we may be required to bear increased risks or reduce the level of our underwriting commitments.
	•	We are subject to credit risk with respect to the obligations of our reinsurers and risk-sharing partners. The inability of our reinsurers or risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations could adversely affect our profitability.
	•	We may face competitive pressures in our business that could adversely affect our profitability.
	•	Our results may fluctuate due to many factors, including cyclical periods of price competition and excess capacity (known as a soft market) followed by periods of high premium rates and reduced underwriting capacity (known as a hard market).

 

THE OFFERING

Common stock we are offering		5,500,000 shares
Common stock offered by the selling shareholders		750,000 shares
Total		6,250,000 shares
Common stock outstanding after the offering		36,030,387 shares
Use of proceeds		We estimate that our net proceeds from this offering, after payment of underwriting discounts and the expenses of the offering, will be approximately $50.0 million, assuming no exercise of the underwriters’ option to acquire additional shares. We plan to use the net proceeds of the offering to temporarily reduce the outstanding balance of $22.0 million on our bank line of credit, to support organic growth of our underwriting business, to fund potential select acquisitions, and for other general corporate purposes.
		We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of shares by the selling shareholders.
Risk factors		See “Risk Factors” beginning on page S-9 of this prospectus supplement and page 3 of the accompanying prospectus and other information included in this prospectus supplement for a discussion of risks you should consider before deciding to invest in our common stock.
New York Stock Exchange Symbol		MIG

	•	174,200 shares reserved for issuance on the exercise of options granted under our existing stock option plan at an average option exercise price of $11.53 per share; and
	•	778,790 additional shares available for future issuance under our equity incentive plans.

 

An investment in our common stock involves a number of risks. You should carefully consider the following information about these risks, together with the other information contained in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus as well as in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, which is incorporated herein by reference, before investing in our common stock. Additional risks not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, may also impair our business or results of operations. Any of the risks described could result in a significant or material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations, and a corresponding decline in the market price of our common stock. You could lose all or part of your investment.

 

This prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus also contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks described below and elsewhere in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. See “Special Note on Forward-Looking Statements.”

 

If our estimates of reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses are not adequate, we will have to increase our reserves, which would result in reductions in net income, retained earnings, statutory surplus, and liquidity.

 

We establish reserves for losses and expenses related to the adjustment of losses for the insurance policies we write. We determine the amount of these reserves based on our best estimate and judgment of the losses and costs we will incur on existing insurance policies. Star Insurance Company (“Star”), Savers Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“Savers”), Williamsburg National Insurance Company (“Williamsburg”) and Ameritrust Insurance Corporation (“Ameritrust”, and together with Star, Savers and Williamsburg, the “Insurance Company Subsidiaries”) obtain an annual statement of opinion from an independent actuarial firm on these reserves. While we believe our reserves are adequate, we base these reserves on assumptions about past and future events. The following factors could have a substantial impact on our future loss experience:

 

 

Actual losses and the costs we incur related to the adjustment of losses under insurance policies could exceed, perhaps substantially, the amount of reserves we establish. When we increase reserves, our net income for the period will decrease by a corresponding amount. An increase in reserves may also require us to write off a portion of our deferred acquisition costs asset, which would cause a further reduction of net income in that period.

 

If our financial strength ratings are reduced, we may be adversely impacted.

 

Insurance companies are subject to financial strength ratings produced by external rating agencies. Higher ratings generally indicate greater financial stability and a stronger ability to pay claims. Ratings are assigned by rating agencies to insurers based upon factors they believe are important to policyholders. Ratings are not recommendations to buy, hold, or sell our securities.

 

Our ability to write business is most influenced by our rating from A.M. Best. A.M. Best ratings are designed to assess an insurer’s financial strength and ability to meet continuing obligations to policyholders. Currently, our financial strength rating from A.M. Best is “A−” (Excellent) for our Insurance Company Subsidiaries. There can be no assurance that A.M. Best will not change its rating in the future. A rating downgrade from A.M. Best could materially adversely affect the business we write and our results of operations.

 

If market conditions cause our reinsurance to be more costly or unavailable, we may be required to bear increased risks or reduce the level of our underwriting commitments.

 

As part of our overall risk and capacity management strategy, we purchase reinsurance for significant amounts of risk underwritten by our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, especially for the excess-of-loss and severity risks. Market conditions beyond our control determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance we purchase, which

may affect the level of our business and profitability. Our reinsurance facilities are generally subject to annual renewal. We may be unable to maintain our current reinsurance facilities or to obtain other reinsurance in adequate amounts and at favorable rates. Increases in the cost of reinsurance would adversely affect our profitability. In addition, if we are unable to renew our expiring facilities or to obtain new reinsurance on favorable terms, either our net exposure to risk would increase or, if we are unwilling to bear an increase in net risk exposures, we would have to reduce the amount of risk we underwrite.

 

We are subject to credit risk with respect to the obligations of our reinsurers and risk-sharing partners. The inability of our reinsurers or risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations could adversely affect our profitability.

 

Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries cede insurance to other insurers under pro rata and excess-of-loss contracts. These reinsurance arrangements diversify our business and reduce our exposure to large losses or from hazards of an unusual nature. We transfer some of the risk we have assumed to reinsurance companies in exchange for a portion of the premium we receive in connection with the risk. Although reinsurance makes the reinsurer liable to us to the extent the risk is transferred, the ceding of insurance does not discharge us of our primary liability to our policyholder. If all or any of the reinsuring companies fail to pay or pay on a timely basis, we would be liable for such defaulted amounts. Therefore, we are subject to credit risk with respect to the obligations of our reinsurers. If our reinsurers fail to pay us or fail to pay on a timely basis, our financial results and financial condition could be adversely affected. In order to minimize our exposure to significant losses from reinsurer insolvencies, we evaluate the financial condition of our reinsurers and monitor the economic characteristics of the reinsurers on an ongoing basis. As of December 31, 2006, our reinsurance recoverables on paid and unpaid losses was $202.7 million. (See “Reinsurance Considerations that Impact Us” on page S-61.)

 

In addition, with our risk-sharing programs, we are subject to credit risk with respect to the payment of claims by our clients’ captive, rent-a-captive, large deductible programs and indemnification agreements, as well as on the portion of risk either ceded to captives or retained by our clients. The capitalization and creditworthiness of prospective risk-sharing partners is one of the factors we consider upon entering into and renewing risk-sharing programs. Generally, we collateralize balances due from our risk-sharing partners through funds withheld trusts or stand-by letters of credit issued by highly rated banks. No assurance can be given regarding the future ability of any of our risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations. The inability of our risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations could adversely affect our profitability.

 

We face competitive pressures in our business that could cause our revenues to decline and adversely affect our profitability.

 

We compete with a large number of other companies in our selected lines of business. We and our agents compete, and will continue to compete, with major United States, foreign and other regional insurers, as well as mutual companies, specialty insurance companies, underwriting agencies and diversified financial services companies. Many of our competitors have greater financial and marketing resources than we do. Our profitability could be adversely affected if we lose business or any of our agents to competitors offering similar or better products at or below our prices.

 

A number of new, proposed or potential legislative or industry developments could further increase competition in our industry. These developments include:

 

 

These developments could make the property and casualty insurance marketplace more competitive by increasing the supply of insurance capacity. In that event, the current trend toward a softer market could be accelerated and may negatively influence our ability to maintain or increase rates. Accordingly, these developments could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our results may fluctuate as a result of many factors, including cyclical changes in the insurance industry.

 

The results of companies in the property and casualty insurance industry historically have been subject to significant fluctuations and uncertainties. Our industry’s profitability can be affected by:

 

 

The demand for property and casualty insurance can also vary significantly, rising as the overall level of economic activity increases and falling as that activity decreases. The property and casualty insurance industry historically is cyclical in nature, with periods of reduced underwriting capacity and favorable premium rates alternating with periods of excess underwriting capacity and flat or falling premium rates. These fluctuations in demand and supply could produce underwriting results that would have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

Negative developments within the workers’ compensation insurance industry may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

 

Although we engage in other businesses, approximately 34% of our premium was attributable to workers’ compensation insurance for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2007. As a result, negative developments within the economic, competitive or regulatory conditions affecting the workers’ compensation insurance industry may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. For example, if legislators in one of our larger markets, such as Florida, Nevada, or Massachusetts, were to enact legislation to increase the scope or amount of benefits for employees under workers’ compensation insurance policies without related premium increases or loss control measures, this could negatively affect the workers’ compensation insurance industry. In some states, workers’ compensation insurance premium rates are determined by regulation, and changes in mandated rates could reduce our profitability. Negative developments within the workers’ compensation insurance industry could have a greater effect on us than on more diversified insurance companies with more diversified lines of insurance.

 

The failure of any of the loss limitation methods we employ could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

 

We seek to limit our loss exposure by writing a number of our insurance and reinsurance contracts on an excess-of-loss basis. Excess-of-loss insurance and reinsurance indemnifies the insured against losses in excess of a specified amount. In addition, we limit program size for each client and purchase third-party reinsurance for our own account. In the case of our assumed proportional reinsurance treaties, we seek per occurrence limitations or loss and loss expense ratio caps to limit the impact of losses ceded by the client. In proportional reinsurance, the reinsurer shares a proportional part of the premiums and losses of the reinsured. We also seek to limit our loss exposure by geographic diversification. Various provisions of our policies, such as limitations or exclusions from coverage or choice of forum negotiated to limit our risks, may not be enforceable in the manner we intend. As a result, one or more catastrophic or other events could result in claims that substantially exceed our expectations, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

 

Because our investment portfolio consists primarily of fixed income securities, our investment income could suffer as a result of fluctuations in interest rates and market conditions.

 

We currently maintain and intend to continue to maintain an investment portfolio consisting primarily of fixed income securities. The fair value of these securities fluctuates depending on changes in interest rates. Generally, the

fair market value of these investments increases or decreases in an inverse relationship with changes in interest rates, while net investment income earned by us from future investments in fixed income securities will generally increase or decrease with interest rates. Changes in interest rates may result in fluctuations in the income derived from, and the valuation of, our fixed income investments, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

In addition, our investment portfolio includes mortgage-backed securities. As of March 31, 2007, mortgage-backed securities constituted approximately 20.5% of our invested assets. As with other fixed income investments, the fair market value of these securities fluctuates depending on market and other general economic conditions and the interest rate environment. Changes in interest rates can expose us to prepayment risks on these investments. When interest rates fall, mortgage-backed securities are prepaid more quickly than expected and the holder must reinvest the proceeds at lower interest rates. Our mortgage-backed securities currently consist of securities with features that reduce the risk of prepayment, but there is no guarantee that we will not invest in other mortgage-backed securities that lack this protection. In periods of increasing interest rates, mortgage-backed securities are prepaid more slowly, which may require us to receive interest payments that are below the prevailing interest rates for longer than expected.

 

We could be forced to sell investments to meet our liquidity requirements.

 

We believe we maintain adequate amounts of cash and short-term investments to pay claims, and do not expect to have to sell securities prematurely for such purposes. We may, however, decide to sell securities as a result of changes in interest rates, credit quality, the rate or repayment or other similar factors. A significant increase in market interest rates could result in a situation in which we are required to sell securities at depressed prices to fund payments to our insureds. Since we carry debt securities at fair value, we expect these securities would be sold with no material impact on our net equity, although it could result in net realized losses. If these securities are sold, future net investment income may be reduced if we are unable to reinvest in securities with similar yields.

 

Because we are heavily regulated by the states in which we operate, we may be limited in the way we operate.

 

We are subject to extensive supervision and regulation in the states in which we operate. The supervision and regulation relate to numerous aspects of our business and financial condition. The primary purpose of the supervision and regulation is to maintain compliance with insurance regulations and to protect policyholders and not our shareholders. The extent of regulation varies, but generally is governed by state statutes. These statutes delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative authority to state insurance departments. This system of regulation covers, among other things:

 

 

The regulations of the state insurance departments may affect the cost or demand for our products and may impede us from obtaining rate increases or taking other actions we might wish to take to increase our profitability. Furthermore, we may be unable to maintain all required licenses and approvals and our business may not fully comply with the wide variety of applicable laws and regulations or the relevant authority’s interpretation of the laws and regulations. Also, regulatory authorities have relatively broad discretion to grant, renew or revoke licenses and approvals. If we do not have the requisite licenses and approvals or do not comply with applicable regulatory

requirements, the insurance regulatory authorities could stop or temporarily suspend us from conducting some or all of our activities or monetarily penalize us.

 

Also, the insurance industry has recently become the focus of increased scrutiny by regulatory authorities relating to the placement of insurance, as well as claims handling by insurers in the wake of recent hurricane losses. Some states have adopted new disclosure requirements relating to the placement of insurance business, while other states are considering what additional regulatory oversight might be required with regard to claims handling activities of insurers. It is difficult to predict the outcome of these regulatory activities, whether they will expand into other areas of the business not yet contemplated, whether activities and practices currently thought of to be lawful will be characterized as unlawful and what form of additional or new regulations may be finally adopted and what impact, if any, such increase regulatory actions may have on our business. We have received general industry-wide requests for information from a few state insurance departments regarding compensation with insurance agents. We responded to these inquires. Subsequent to our responses, we have not received any further inquiries or comments from the state insurance departments.

 

Our reliance on producers subjects us to their credit risk.

 

With respect to our agency billed premiums generated by our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, producers collect premiums from the policyholders and forward them to us. In certain jurisdictions, when the insured pays premium for these policies to producers for payment, the premium might be considered to have been paid under applicable insurance laws and the insured will no longer be liable to us for those amounts, whether or not we have actually received the premium from the producer. Consequently, we assume a degree of credit risk associated with producers. Although producers’ failures to remit premiums to us have not caused a material adverse impact on us to date, there may be instances where producers collect premium but do not remit it to us and we may be required under applicable law to provide the coverage set forth in the policy despite the actual collection of the premium by us. Because the possibility of these events is dependent in large part upon the financial condition and internal operations of our producers, we may not be able to quantify any potential exposure presented by the risk. If we are unable to collect premium from our producers in the future, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

 

Provisions of the Michigan Business Corporation Act, our articles of incorporation and other corporate governing documents and the insurance laws of Michigan, Missouri, California and Florida may discourage takeover attempts.

 

The Michigan Business Corporation Act contains “anti-takeover” provisions. Chapters 7A (the “Fair Price Act”) and 7B (the “Control Share Act”) of the Business Corporation Act apply to us and may have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt that a shareholder might consider in their best interest, including those attempts that might result in shareholders receiving a premium over market price for their shares.

 

The Fair Price Act provides that a supermajority vote of 90 percent of the shareholders and no less than two-thirds of the votes of non interested shareholders must approve a “business combination.” The Fair Price Act defines a “business combination” to encompass any merger, consolidation, share exchange, sale of assets, stock issue, liquidation, or reclassification of securities involving an “interested shareholder” or certain “affiliates.” An “interested shareholder” is generally any person who owns ten percent or more of the outstanding voting shares of the company. An “affiliate” is a person who directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, a specified person. The supermajority vote required by the Fair Price Act does not apply to business combinations that satisfy certain conditions. These conditions include, among others: (i) the purchase price to be paid for the shares of the company in the business combination must be at least equal to the highest of either (a) the market value of the shares or (b) the highest per share price paid by the interested shareholder within the preceding two-year period or in the transaction in which the shareholder became an interested shareholder, whichever is higher; and (ii) once becoming an interested shareholder, the person may not become the beneficial owner of any additional shares of the company except as part of the transaction which resulted in the interested shareholder becoming an interested shareholder or by virtue of proportionate stock splits or stock dividends.

The Control Share Act establishes procedures governing “control share acquisitions” of large public Michigan corporations. A control share acquisition is defined as an acquisition of shares by an acquiror which, when combined with other shares held by that person or entity, would give the acquiror voting power, alone or as part of a group, at or above any of the following thresholds: 20 percent, 331/3 percent or 50 percent. Under the Control Share Act, an acquiror may not vote “control shares” unless the company’s disinterested shareholders (defined to exclude the acquiring person, officers of the target company, and directors of the target company who are also employees of the company) vote to confer voting rights on the control shares. The Control Share Act does not affect the voting rights of shares owned by an acquiring person prior to the control share acquisition. The Control Share Act entitles corporations to redeem control shares from the acquiring person under certain circumstances. In other cases, the Control Share Act confers dissenters’ right upon all of the corporation’s shareholders except the acquiring person.

 

Our articles of incorporation allow our Board of Directors to issue one or more classes or series of preferred stock with voting rights, preferences and other privileges as the Board of Directors may determine. Also, we have adopted a shareholder rights plan which if triggered would significantly dilute the stock ownership percentage of anyone who acquires more than fifteen percent of our shares without the approval of our Board of Directors. The existence of our shareholder rights plan and the possible issuance of preferred shares could adversely affect the holders of our common stock and could prevent, delay or defer a change of control.

 

We are also subject to the laws of various states, such as Michigan, Missouri, California, and Florida, governing insurance holding companies. Under these laws, a person generally must obtain the applicable Insurance Department’s approval to acquire, directly or indirectly, five to ten percent or more of the outstanding voting securities of our Insurance Company Subsidiaries. An Insurance Department’s determination of whether to approve an acquisition would be based on a variety of factors, including an evaluation of the acquirer’s financial stability, the competence of its management, and whether competition in that state would be reduced. These laws may prevent, delay or defer a change of control of us or our Insurance Company Subsidiaries.

 

Most states assess our Insurance Company Subsidiaries to provide funds for failing insurance companies and those assessments could be material.

 

Our Insurance Company Subsidiaries are subject to assessments in most states where we are licensed for the provision of funds necessary for the settlement of covered claims under certain policies provided by impaired, insolvent or failed insurance companies. Maximum contributions required by law in any one year vary by state, and have historically been less than one percent of annual premiums written. We cannot predict with certainty the amount of future assessments. Significant assessments could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

We may require additional capital in the future, which may not be available or may only be available on unfavorable terms.

 

Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including our ability to write new business successfully and to establish premium rates and reserves at levels sufficient to cover losses. To the extent that our present capital is insufficient to meet future operating requirements and/or cover losses, we may need to raise additional funds through financings. Based on our current operating plan, we believe our capital growth strategy, together with the proceeds of this offering, will support our operations without the need to raise additional capital. However, we cannot provide any assurance in that regard, since many factors will affect our capital needs and their amount and timing, including our growth and profitability, our claims experience, and the availability of reinsurance, as well as possible acquisition opportunities, market disruptions and other unforeseeable developments. If we had to raise additional capital, equity or debt financing may not be available or, may be on terms that are not favorable to us. In the case of equity financings, dilution to our shareholders could result, and in any case such securities may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to those of the shares offered hereby. If we cannot obtain adequate capital on favorable terms or at all, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

We have broad discretion in the use of the net proceeds from an offering and may not use them effectively.

 

Our management will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds from this offering and could spend the proceeds in ways that do not necessarily improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our common stock. The failure by our management to apply these proceeds effectively could result in financial losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business and cause the price of our common stock to decline.

 

Our performance is dependent on the continued services and performance of our senior management and other key personnel.

 

The success of our business is dependent on our ability to retain and motivate our senior management and key management personnel. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers or other key employees could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. We have existing employment or severance agreements with Merton J. Segal, Robert S. Cubbin, Michael G. Costello, Karen M. Spaun, Stephen Belden, Robert C. Spring, Archie S. McIntyre, and Kenn R. Allen. We maintain a “key person” life insurance policy on Robert S. Cubbin, our President and CEO.

 

Our future success also will depend on our ability to attract, train, motivate and retain other highly skilled technical, managerial, marketing, and customer service personnel. Competition for these employees is intense and we may not be able to successfully attract, integrate or retain sufficiently qualified personnel. In addition, our future success depends on our ability to attract, retain and motivate our agents and other producers. Our failure to attract and retain the necessary personnel and producers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

 

We rely on our information technology and telecommunications systems to conduct our business.

 

Our business is dependent upon the uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunication systems. We rely upon our systems, as well as the systems of our vendors, to underwrite and process our business, make claim payments, provide customer service, provide policy administration services, such as endorsements, cancellations and premium collections, comply with insurance regulatory requirements and perform actuarial and other analytical functions necessary for pricing and product development. Our operations are dependent upon our ability to timely and efficiently process our business and protect our information and telecommunications systems from physical loss, telecommunications failure or other similar catastrophic events, as well as from security breaches. While we have implemented business contingency plans and other reasonable and appropriate internal controls to protect our systems from interruption, loss or security breaches, a sustained business interruption or system failure could adversely impact our ability to process our business, provide customer service, pay claims in a timely manner or perform other necessary business functions. Likewise, a security breach of our computer systems could also interrupt or damage our operations or harm our reputation in the event confidential customer information is disclosed to third parties. Either of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition, operations or reputation.

 

Managing technology initiatives and obtaining the efficiencies anticipated with technology implementation may present significant challenges.

 

While technological enhancements and initiatives can streamline several business processes and ultimately reduce the costs of operations, these initiatives can present short-term costs and implementation risks. Projections of associated costs, implementation timelines, and the benefits of those results may be inaccurate and such inaccuracies could increase over time. In addition, there are risks associated with not achieving the anticipated efficiencies from technology implementation that could impact our results of operations.

 

Some of the information in this prospectus supplement and the prospectus and the documents incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement and the prospectus may contain forward-looking statements. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking phrases such as “will,” “may,” “are expected to,” “is anticipated,” “estimate,” “target,” “forecast,” “plan,” “should,” “projected,” “intends to,” or other similar words. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected, such as:

 

 

We have described these and other risks under “Risk Factors.” You should keep in mind these risk factors and other cautionary statements in this prospectus supplement when considering forward-looking statements.

 

Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise our forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

 

We will receive approximately $50.0 million in net proceeds from this offering after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and our estimated expenses for this offering of approximately $3.0 million. If the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares of common stock is exercised in full, we estimate that our net proceeds will be approximately $58.6 million. We plan to use the net proceeds of the offering to temporarily reduce the outstanding balance of $22.0 million on our bank line of credit, to support organic growth of our underwriting business, to fund potential select acquisitions, and for other general corporate purposes.

 

As of the date of this prospectus supplement, we cannot specify with certainty all of the particular uses for the net proceeds to us from this offering. Accordingly, we will retain broad discretion over the use of these proceeds. Pending the use of the net proceeds, we intend to invest the net proceeds in a variety of capital preservation investments, including short-term, interest-bearing, and investment-grade securities.

 

While we have paid dividends in the past, we have not in the past five years paid dividends on our common stock. Our Board of Directors considers whether or not a dividend will be declared based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to our cashflow, liquidity needs, results of operations and financial condition. As a holding company, we are dependent upon dividends and other permitted payments from our subsidiaries to pay any cash dividend. Our regulated subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends to us is limited by government regulations. See “Business — Regulations that Impact Us” on page S-66.

 

The following table shows our capitalization at March 31, 2007, and as adjusted to give effect to (i) our acquisition of the business of USSU on April 16, 2007 and (ii) the sale of the common stock offered by this prospectus supplement based upon the public offering price of $9.65 per share and after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses of approximately $3.0 million.

 

 

 

 

Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “MIG.” The following table shows the high and low prices of our common stock as reported by the NYSE and our dividends declared for each fiscal period shown.

 

 

 

 

On July 18, 2007, the last reported sale price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $9.65 per share. As of July 17, 2007, there were 246 holders of record of our common stock.

 

The following tables set forth our selected historical consolidated financial and operating information for the periods ended and as of the dates indicated. The selected consolidated income statement data for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 are derived from our audited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus supplement, which have been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The selected consolidated income statement data for the year ended December 31, 2004 are derived from our audited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus supplement, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP and have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. The selected consolidated income statement data for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002 are derived for our audited financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP and have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The selected unaudited consolidated income statement data for the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006 and the balance sheet data as of March 31, 2007 and 2006 are derived from our unaudited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus supplement, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. The selected unaudited consolidated financial statements include all adjustments, other than normal recurring adjustments, which we consider necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the interim periods presented. These historical results are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected from any future period.

 

You should read the following selected consolidated financial information together with the other information contained in this prospectus supplement, including the section captioned “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus supplement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management uses the GAAP combined ratio and its components to assess and benchmark underwriting performance.

 

The GAAP combined ratio is the sum of the GAAP loss and loss adjustment expense ratio and the GAAP expense ratio. The GAAP loss and loss adjustment expense ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and loss adjustment expenses in relation to net earned premiums. The GAAP expense ratio is the unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net earned premiums.

 

Overview

 

We are a specialty risk management organization offering a full range of insurance products and services, focused on niche and specialty program business, which we believe is under served by the standard insurance market. Program business refers to an aggregation of individually underwritten risks that have some unique characteristic and are distributed through a select group of focused general agencies, retail agencies and program administrators. We perform the majority of underwriting and claims services associated with these programs. We provide property and casualty insurance coverage and services through programs and alternative risk management solutions for agents, professional and trade associations and small to medium-sized insureds.

 

We operate in the specialty insurance market, which differs significantly from the standard market. In the standard market, insurance rates and forms are highly regulated, with largely uniform products and coverages, and companies tend to compete for customers on the basis of price and distribute their products through a large number of independent agents. In contrast, our specialty market provides coverage for unique, homogenous or hard-to-place risks that may not easily fit the underwriting criteria of standard carriers. Our products and services are generally distributed through a select group of more focused general agencies, retail agencies, and program administrators. Policies or risks written in the specialty insurance market usually cover insureds engaged in similar, but highly specialized activities that are not often recognized as a program by standard insurers or involve insurance products or classes of insureds that are often overlooked by large admitted carriers.

 

We pursue niche-focused underwriting in areas that tend to exhibit a reduced level of competition. This focus has allowed us to improve underwriting results through controlled and disciplined growth with long-term program partners. Furthermore, our fee-based and commission income operations generate a stream of consistent revenue, which helps to dampen the potential volatility generally associated with underwriting operations.

 

We have a disciplined management team and culture of accountability which we believe has helped us to effectively manage our capital. Since our last public offering in 2002, we have established a strong track record of success in deploying capital. Since 2002, we have increased our revenues from $197.8 million to $318.2 million in 2006, representing a compound annual growth rate of 12.6%; earnings per share have grown from $0.08 in 2002 to $0.75 in 2006; and book value per share increased from $4.98 at December 31, 2002 to $6.93 at December 31, 2006. This financial performance was achieved, in part, by reducing our combined ratio from 108.6% in 2002 to 96.8% in 2006.

 

A.M. Best Upgrade

 

In April 2007, we announced the upgrade of our financial strength rating by A.M. Best Company to “A−” (Excellent), from “B++” (Very Good) for our Insurance Company Subsidiaries. With the upgrade, we believe we are well positioned to attract additional solid underwriting prospects from new and existing insurance programs and should realize significant cost savings in the future.

 

Critical Accounting Policies

 

In certain circumstances, we are required to make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and related footnotes. We evaluate these estimates and assumptions on an on-going basis based on a variety of factors. There can be no assurance, however, that actual results will not be materially different than our estimates and assumptions, and that reported results of operation will not be affected by accounting adjustments needed to reflect changes in these estimates and assumptions. We believe the following policies are the most sensitive to estimates and judgments.

 

Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses

 

Significant periods of time can elapse between the occurrence of a loss, the reporting of the loss to the insurer, and the insurer’s payment of that loss. To recognize liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses

(“LAE”), insurers establish reserves as balance sheet liabilities representing estimates of amounts needed to pay reported and unreported net losses and LAE.

 

We establish a liability for losses and LAE, which represent case based estimates of reported unpaid losses and LAE and actuarial estimates of incurred but not reported losses (“IBNR”) and LAE. Such liabilities, by necessity, are based upon estimates and, while we believe the amount of our reserves is adequate, the ultimate liability may be greater or less than the estimate. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, we have accrued $501.1 million and $458.7 million of gross loss and LAE reserves, respectively.

 

The following table sets forth our gross and net reserves for losses and LAE based upon an underlying source of data, at December 31, 2006 (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

In reference to the above table, the reserves related to our direct business and assumed business which we manage directly, are established through transactions processed through our internal systems and related controls. Accordingly, the case reserves are established on a current basis, therefore there is no backlog, and IBNR is determined utilizing various actuarial methods based upon historical data. Ultimate reserve estimates related to assumed business from residual markets are provided by individual states on a two quarter lag and include an estimated reserve based upon actuarial methods for this lag. Assumed business which is subsequently 100% retroceded to participating reinsurers relates to business previously discontinued and now is in run-off. Lastly, in relation to assumed business from other sources, we receive case and paid loss data within a forty-five day reporting period and develop our estimates for IBNR based on both current and historical data.

 

The completeness and accuracy of data received by cedants on assumed business that we do not manage directly is verified through monthly reconciliations to detailed statements, inception to date rollforwards of claim data, actuarial estimates of historical trends, field audits, and a series of management oversight reports on a program basis.

 

The following table sets forth our net case and IBNR reserves for losses and LAE by line of business at December 31, 2006 (in thousands):

 

When a claim is reported to one of our Insurance Company Subsidiaries, for the majority of claims, our claims personnel within our risk management subsidiary will establish a case reserve for the estimated amount of the ultimate payment for a majority of our claims. The amount of the reserve is primarily based upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of claim involved, the circumstances surrounding each claim, and the policy provisions relating to the type of losses. The estimate reflects the informed judgment of such personnel based on general insurance reserving practices, as well as the experience and knowledge of the claims person. Until the claim is resolved, these estimates are revised as deemed necessary by the responsible claims personnel based on subsequent developments, new information or periodic reviews of the claims.

 

In addition to case reserves and in accordance with industry practice, we maintain estimates of reserves for losses and LAE incurred but not yet reported. We project an estimate of ultimate losses and LAE at each reporting date. The difference between the projected ultimate loss and LAE reserves and the case loss reserves and LAE reserves, is carried as IBNR reserves. By using both estimates of reported claims and IBNR determined using generally accepted actuarial reserving techniques, we estimate the ultimate liability for losses and LAE, net of reinsurance recoverables.

 

Our reserves are reviewed by internal and independent actuaries for adequacy on a quarterly basis. When reviewing reserves, we analyze historical data and estimate the impact of various factors such as: (1) per claim information; (2) industry and our historical loss experience; (3) legislative enactments, judicial decisions, legal developments in the imposition of damages, and changes in political attitudes; and (4) trends in general economic conditions, including the effects of inflation. This process assumes that past experience, adjusted for the effects of current developments and anticipated trends, is an appropriate basis for predicting future events. There is no precise method, however, for subsequently evaluating the impact of any specific factor on the adequacy of reserves, because the eventual deficiency or redundancy is affected by multiple factors.

 

The key assumptions we use in our selection of ultimate reserves include underlying actuarial methodologies, a review of current pricing and underwriting initiatives, an evaluation of reinsurance costs and retention levels, and a detailed claims analysis with an emphasis on how aggressive claims handling may be impacting the paid and incurred loss data trends embedded in the traditional actuarial methods. With respect to the ultimate estimates for losses and LAE, the key assumptions remained consistent for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.

 

Reinsurance Recoverables

 

Reinsurance recoverables represent (1) amounts currently due from reinsurers on paid losses and LAE, (2) amounts recoverable from reinsurers on case basis estimates of reported losses and LAE, and (3) amounts recoverable from reinsurers on actuarial estimates of IBNR losses and LAE. Such recoverables, by necessity, are based upon estimates. Reinsurance does not legally discharge us from our legal liability to our insureds, but it does make the assuming reinsurer liable to us to the extent of the reinsurance ceded. Instead of being netted against the appropriate liabilities, ceded unearned premiums and reinsurance recoverables on paid and unpaid losses and LAE are reported separately as assets in our consolidated balance sheets. Reinsurance recoverable balances are also subject to credit risk associated with the particular reinsurer. In our selection of reinsurers, we continually evaluate their financial stability. While we believe our reinsurance recoverables are collectible, the ultimate recoverable may be greater or less than the amount accrued. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, reinsurance recoverables on paid and unpaid losses were $202.7 million and $202.6 million, respectively.

 

In our risk-sharing programs, we are subject to credit risk with respect to the payment of claims by our clients’ captive, rent-a-captive, large deductible programs, indemnification agreements, or on the portion of risk either ceded to the captives, or retained by the clients. The capitalization and credit worthiness of prospective risk-sharing partners is one of the factors we consider upon entering into and renewing risk-sharing programs. We collateralize balances due from our risk-sharing partners through funds withheld trusts or stand-by letters of credit issued by highly rated banks. We have historically maintained an allowance for the potential uncollectibility of certain reinsurance balances due from some risk-sharing partners, some of which are in litigation. At the end of each quarter, an analysis of these exposures is conducted to determine the potential exposure to uncollectibility. At December 31, 2006, we believe this allowance is adequate. To date, we have not, in the aggregate, experienced

material difficulties in collecting balances from our risk-sharing partners. No assurance can be given, however, regarding the future ability of any of our risk-sharing partners to meet their obligations.

 

Investments and Other Than Temporary Impairments of Securities and Unrealized Losses on Investments

 

Our investment securities are classified as available for sale. Investments classified as available for sale are available to be sold in the future in response to our liquidity needs, changes in market interest rates, tax strategies and asset-liability management strategies, among other reasons. Available for sale securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses reported in the accumulated other comprehensive income component of shareholders’ equity, net of deferred taxes and, accordingly, have no effect on net income. However, if there is a decline in the fair value of an investment below its cost and the decline is considered other than temporary, the amount of decline below cost is charged to earnings.

 

Our investment portfolio is primarily invested in debt securities classified as available for sale, with a concentration in fixed income securities of a high quality. Our investment philosophy is to maximize after-tax earnings and maintain significant investments in tax-exempt bonds. Our policy for the valuation of temporarily impaired securities is to determine impairment based on analysis of, but not limited to, the following factors: (1) rating downgrade or other credit event (e.g., failure to pay interest when due); (2) financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, including any specific events which may influence the operations of the issuer such as changes in technology or discontinuance of a business segment; (3) prospects for the issuer’s industry segment; and (4) intent and ability to retain the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for anticipated recovery in market value. We evaluate our investments in securities to determine other than temporary impairment, no less than quarterly. Investments that are deemed other than temporarily impaired are written down to their estimated net fair value and the related losses recognized in income. There were no impaired investments written down in 2006, 2005, and 2004. There can be no assurance, however, that significant changes in the above factors in relation to our investment portfolio, will not result in future impairment charges.

 

At March 31, 2007, we had 289 securities that were in an unrealized loss position. These investments all had unrealized losses of less than ten percent. At March 31, 2007, 194 of those investments, with an aggregate $192.3 million and $3.8 million fair value and unrealized loss, respectively, have been in an unrealized loss position for more than eighteen months.

 

At December 31, 2006 and 2005, we had 293 and 267 securities that were in an unrealized loss position, respectively. These investments all had unrealized losses of less than ten percent. At December 31, 2006, 128 of those investments, with an aggregate $127.3 million and $3.1 million fair value and unrealized loss, respectively, have been in an unrealized loss position for more than eighteen months. At December 31, 2005, thirty-nine of those investments, with an aggregate $29.9 million and $1.2 million fair value and unrealized loss, respectively, have been in an unrealized loss position for more than eighteen months. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, gross unrealized losses on available for sale securities were $5.1 million and $5.5 million, respectively.

 

Positive evidence considered in reaching our conclusion that the investments in an unrealized loss position are not other than temporarily impaired consisted of: 1) there were no specific events which caused concerns; 2) there were no past due interest payments; 3) there has been a rise in market prices; 4) our ability and intent to retain the investment for a sufficient amount of time to allow an anticipated recovery in value; and 5) changes in market value were considered normal in relation to overall fluctuations in interest rates.

 

Revenue Recognition

 

We recognize premiums written as earned on a pro rata basis over the life of the policy term. Unearned premiums represent the portion of premiums written that are applicable to the unexpired terms of an in force policy. Provisions for unearned premiums on reinsurance assumed from others are made on the basis of ceding reports when received and actuarial estimates.

 

For the year ending December 31, 2006, total assumed written premiums were $83.9 million, of which $72.6 million relates to assumed business we manage directly, and therefore, no estimation is involved. The remaining $11.3 million of assumed written premiums includes $10.1 million related to residual markets.

Assumed premium estimates are specifically related to the mandatory assumed pool business from the National Council on Compensation Insurance (“NCCI”), or residual market business. The pools cede workers’ compensation business to participating companies based upon the individual company’s market share by state. The activity is reported from the NCCI to participating companies on a two quarter lag. To accommodate this lag, we estimate premium and loss activity based on historical and market based results. Historically, we have not experienced any material difficulties or disputes in collecting balances from NCCI; and therefore, no provision for doubtful accounts is recorded related to the assumed premium estimate.

 

In addition, certain premiums are subject to retrospective premium adjustments. Premium is recognized over the term of the insurance contract.

 

Fee income, which includes risk management consulting, loss control, and claims administration services, is recognized in the period the services are provided. Claims processing fees are recognized as revenue over the estimated life of the claims, or the estimated life of the contract. For those contracts that provide services beyond the contractually defined termination date of the related contracts, fees are deferred in an amount equal to an estimate of our obligation to continue to provide services.

 

Commission income, which includes reinsurance placement, is recorded on the later of the effective date or the billing date of the policies on which they were earned. Commission income is reported net of any sub-producer commission expense. Any commission adjustments that occur subsequent to the earnings process are recognized upon notification from the insurance companies. Profit sharing commissions from insurance companies are recognized when determinable, which is when such commissions are received.

 

We review, on an ongoing basis, the collectibility of our receivables and establish an allowance for estimated uncollectible accounts. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the allowance for uncollectibles on receivables was $2.9 million and $3.9 million, respectively.

 

Legal Contingencies

 

We are subject at times to various claims, lawsuits and proceedings relating principally to alleged errors or omissions in the placement of insurance, claims administration, consulting services and other business transactions arising in the ordinary course of business. Where appropriate, we vigorously defend such claims, lawsuits and proceedings. Some of these claims, lawsuits and proceedings seek damages, including consequential, exemplary or punitive damages, in amounts that could, if awarded, be significant. Most of the claims, lawsuits and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business are covered by errors and omissions insurance or other appropriate insurance. In terms of deductibles associated with such insurance, we have established provisions against these items, which are believed to be adequate in light of current information and legal advice. In accordance with SFAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” if it is probable that an asset has been impaired or a liability has been incurred as of the date of the financial statements and the amount of loss is estimable, an accrual is provided for the costs to resolve these claims in our consolidated financial statements. Period expenses related to the defense of such claims are included in other operating expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of income. We, with the assistance of outside counsel, adjust such provisions according to new developments or changes in the strategy in dealing with such matters. On the basis of current information, we do not expect the outcome of the claims, lawsuits and proceedings to which we are subject to, either individually, or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. However, it is possible that future results of operations or cash flows for any particular quarter or annual period could be materially affected by an unfavorable resolution of any such matters.

 

Goodwill

 

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of net assets of subsidiaries acquired. As required by SFAS No. 142 “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” we no longer amortize goodwill and, at least annually, we test all existing goodwill for impairment using a fair value approach, on a reporting unit basis. Our annual assessment date for goodwill impairment testing is October 1st. We test for impairment more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that there may be an impairment to goodwill. We carry goodwill on two reporting units within the agency operations segment in the amount of $6.5 million and three reporting units within

the specialty risk management operations segment in the amount of $25.0 million. Based on our most recent evaluation of goodwill impairment, we determined that no impairment to goodwill exists.

 

Results of Operations

 

General Overview

 

For the first quarter of 2007, we continued to experience an improvement in our overall results in comparison to prior year. This improvement continues to reflect our selective growth, as well as our adherence to strict corporate underwriting guidelines and price adequacy. We continue to be committed to strong underwriting discipline and growth within our profitable programs. We continue to experience solid growth in our fee-based operations.

 

Overall underwriting results in 2006 continued to show improvement in comparison to 2005. Our results for 2006 demonstrated our commitment to strong underwriting discipline, as well as improved profitability within our specialty insurance and fee-for-service programs. Net income for 2006 in comparison to 2005 was indicative of our selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and controls over price adequacy. We continued to achieve operational efficiencies and enhancements in 2006.

 

Our generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) combined ratio improved 1.9 percentage points to 96.8% in 2006 from 98.7% in 2005. For the first quarter of 2007, our combined ratio remained relatively consistent in comparison to 2006 at 96.3%.

 

Quarter ended March 31, 2007 versus March 31, 2006

 

Gross written premium was relatively flat for the first quarter of 2007 in comparison to 2006. Our existing underwritten business increased by $4.5 million growth, or 5.4% over the first quarter of 2006. This growth included business from new programs implemented in 2006. The growth in existing business was slightly offset by a reduction in residual market premiums that are assigned to us as a result of a decrease in the estimate of the overall size of the residual market. We continue to follow pricing guidelines mandated by our corporate underwriting guidelines. Overall, our first quarter rate change was relatively flat. We anticipate rates to remain relatively stable in 2007. We continue to be selective on new program implementation by focusing only on those programs that meet our underwriting guidelines and have a proven history of profitability.

 

Our net income for the three months ended March 31, 2007, was $6.9 million, or $0.23 per dilutive share, compared to net income of $5.6 million, or $0.19 per dilutive share, for the comparable period of 2006. This improvement primarily reflects prior accident reserve redundancies, as well as our selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy. This improvement was also attributable to an increase in net investment income in comparison to 2006 as a result of favorable prior year cash flows. These improvements were partially offset by an increase in our expense ratio, primarily associated with a decrease in ceding commissions.

 

Our revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2007, increased $3.3 million, or 4.1%, to $82.9 million, from $79.6 million for the comparable period in 2006. This increase reflects a $2.1 million, or 3.3%, increase in net earned premiums. The increase in net earned premiums is the result of selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy, partially offset by a reduction in residual market premiums that are assigned to us as a result of a decrease in the estimate of the overall size of the residual market. We experienced slight revenue growth within our fee-for-service programs and agency operations, which increased $262,000, or 2.3%, in comparison to the first quarter of 2006. In addition, the increase in revenue reflects a $917,000 increase in investment income, primarily the result of an increase in average invested assets due to positive cash flow and a slight increase in yield.

Specialty Risk Management Operations

 

The following table sets forth the revenues and results from operations for specialty risk management operations (in thousands):

 

 

Our revenues from specialty risk management operations increased $3.4 million, or 4.5%, to $79.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007 from $75.7 million for the comparable period in 2006.

 

Net earned premiums increased $2.1 million, or 3.3%, to $65.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from $63.1 million in the comparable period in 2006. As previously indicated, this increase is the result of selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy, partially offset by the previously mention reduction in residual market premiums.

 

Management fees increased $344,000, or 7.6%, to $4.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from $4.5 million for the comparable period in 2006. This increase is primarily the result of the recognition of $250,000 in profit sharing revenue received related to a specific managed program.

 

Claim fees increased $104,000, or 5.0%, to $2.2 million, from $2.1 million for the comparable period in 2006. This increase is primarily the result of our 2006 entry into the self-insured workers’ compensation market in Nevada.

 

Net investment income increased $900,000, or 17.9%, to $5.9 million in 2007, from $5.0 million in 2006. Average invested assets increased $76.3 million, or 16.4%, to $540.3 million in 2007, from $464.0 million in 2006. The increase in average invested assets reflects cash flows from continued favorable underwriting results and an increase in the duration of our reserves. The increase in the duration of our reserves reflects the impact of growth in our excess liability business, which was implemented at the end of 2003. This type of business has a longer duration than the average reserves on our other programs and is now a larger proportion of reserves. The average investment yield for March 31, 2007, was 4.56%, compared to 4.52% for the comparable period in 2006. The current pre-tax book yield was 4.36%. The current after-tax book yield was 3.34%, compared to 3.15% in 2006. This increase is primarily the result of the shift in our investment portfolio to tax-exempt investments. The duration of the investment portfolio is 4.0 years.

 

Our specialty risk management operations generated pre-tax income of $11.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, compared to pre-tax income of $9.3 million for the comparable period in 2006. This increase in pre-tax income demonstrates a continued improvement in underwriting results as a result of prior accident reserve redundancies, our selective growth in premium, adherence to our strict underwriting guidelines, and our continued focus on process improvements through technology and training. In addition, this improvement was also attributable to an increase in net investment income. These improvements were partially offset by an increase in our expense ratio. The GAAP combined ratio was 96.3% for the three months ended March 31, 2007, compared to 96.2% for the same period in 2006.

Net loss and loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”) decreased $397,000, to $36.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from $37.0 million for the same period in 2006. Our loss and LAE ratio improved 2.4 percentage points to 61.3% for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from 63.7% for the same period in 2006. This ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and LAE in relation to net earned premiums. The accident year loss ratio for the three months ended March 31, 2007 was 64.7%, compared to 63.9% for the same period in 2006. The increase in accident year loss and LAE ratio primarily reflects the anticipated impact of a slightly more competitive insurance market. The calendar year loss and LAE ratio of 61.3% includes favorable development of $2.2 million, or 3.4 percentage points. This favorable development primarily reflects favorable claim settlements in the professional liability and workers’ compensation lines of business. Offsetting these improvements was unfavorable development within the general liability and auto liability lines of business. The unfavorable development within the general liability line of business reflects greater than expected claim activity within an excess liability program. The unfavorable development within the auto liability line of business was primarily the result of unexpected case reserve increases within our California-based energy program. Additional discussion of our reserve activity is described below within the Other Items Reserves section.

 

Our expense ratio increased 2.5 percentage points to 35.0% for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from 32.5% for the same period in 2006. This ratio is the unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net earned premiums. This increase within our expense ratio is primarily the result of a decrease in ceding commissions. The decrease in ceding commissions is the result of a decrease in premiums and the consequent decrease in net fees received from one specific program in which we assume limited risk. For financial reporting purposes, these fees are included in a ceding commission and are treated as a reduction in underwriting expenses. In addition, the expense ratio for the first quarter of 2006 had reflected a reduction in certain insurance related assessments.

 

Agency Operations

 

The following table sets forth the revenues and results from operations from our agency operations (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

Our revenue from agency operations, which consists primarily of agency commission revenue, decreased $376,000, or 8.8%, to $3.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, from $4.3 million for the comparable period in 2006. This decrease is primarily the result of a reduction in premium on client renewals due to a more competitive pricing environment primarily on our larger Michigan accounts.

 

Our agency operations generated pre-tax income, after the allocation of corporate overhead, of $1.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007, compared to $1.7 million for the comparable period in 2006. The decrease in the pre-tax income is primarily attributable to the decrease in agency commission revenue mentioned above.

Reserves

 

At March 31, 2007, our best estimate for the ultimate liability for loss and LAE reserves, net of reinsurance recoverables, was $313.0 million. We established a reasonable range of reserves of approximately $291.0 million to $333.0 million. This range was established primarily by considering the various indications derived from standard actuarial techniques and other appropriate reserve considerations. The following table sets forth this range by line of business (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

Reserves are reviewed by internal and independent actuaries for adequacy on a quarterly basis. When reviewing reserves, we analyze historical data and estimate the impact of numerous factors such as (1) per claim information; (2) industry and our historical loss experience; (3) legislative enactments, judicial decisions, legal developments in the imposition of damages, and changes in political attitudes; and (4) trends in general economic conditions, including the effects of inflation. This process assumes that past experience, adjusted for the effects of current developments and anticipated trends, is an appropriate basis for predicting future events. There is no precise method for subsequently evaluating the impact of any specific factor on the adequacy of reserves, because the eventual deficiency or redundancy is affected by multiple factors.

 

The key assumptions used in our selection of ultimate reserves included the underlying actuarial methodologies, a review of current pricing and underwriting initiatives, an evaluation of reinsurance costs and retention levels, and a detailed claims analysis with an emphasis on how aggressive claims handling may be impacting the paid and incurred loss data trends embedded in the traditional actuarial methods. With respect to the ultimate estimates for losses and LAE, the key assumptions remained consistent for the three months ended March 31, 2007 and the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.

 

For the three months ended March 31, 2007, we reported a decrease in net ultimate loss estimates for accident years 2006 and prior of $2.2 million, or 0.7% of $302.7 million of net loss and LAE reserves at December 31, 2006. The decrease in net ultimate loss estimates reflected revisions in the estimated reserves as a result of actual claims activity in calendar year 2007 that differed from the projected activity. There were no significant changes in the key

assumptions utilized in the analysis and calculations of our reserves during 2006 and for the three months ended March 31, 2007. The major components of this change in ultimate loss estimates are as follows (in thousands):

 

 

 

Workers’ Compensation Excluding Residual Markets — The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the workers’ compensation line of business excluding residual markets decreased $2.8 million, or 2.0% of net workers’ compensation reserves. This net overall decrease reflects decreases of $1.0 million and $691,000 in accident years 2005 and 2004, respectively. These decreases reflect better than expected experience for many of our workers’ compensation programs, including a Nevada, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama program. Average severity on reported claims did not increase as much as anticipated in the prior actuarial projections and, therefore, ultimate loss estimates were reduced. The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.

 

Commercial Multiple Peril and General Liability — The commercial multiple peril line and general liability line of business had an increase in net ultimate loss estimates of $3.1 million, or 4.9% of net commercial multiple peril and general liability reserves. The net increase reflects increases of $355,000, $2.4 million, and $229,000 in the ultimate loss estimates for accident years 2005, 2004 and 2000, which were primarily due to larger than expected claim emergence in a Florida-based program. This emergence reflects greater than expected claim activity within the excess liability program. The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.

 

Commercial Automobile — The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the commercial automobile line of business increased $954,000, or 1.7% of net commercial automobile reserves. This net overall increase reflects increases of $602,000 and $1.4 million in accident years 2005 and 2004, respectively. These increases primarily reflect higher than expected emergence of claim activity in four California-based programs. These increases were

offset by decreases of $662,000 and $231,000 in accident years 2006 and 2003, respectively. Three of the four California programs mentioned above contributed to these decreases. The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.

 

Other — The projected net ultimate loss estimate for the other lines of business decreased $2.0 million, or 9.3% of net reserves. This net decrease reflects decreases of $334,000, $957,000, and $425,000, in the net ultimate loss estimate for accident years 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. These decreases were due to better than expected case reserve development during the calendar year in a medical malpractice program. The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.

 

Residual Markets — The workers’ compensation residual market line of business had a decrease in net ultimate loss estimates of $1.5 million, or 5.8% of net reserves. This decrease reflects reductions of $1.4 million and $946,000 in accident years 2005 and 2004, respectively. Offsetting these decreases was an increase of $803,000 in accident year 2006. We record loss reserves as reported by the National Council on Compensation Insurance (“NCCI”), plus a provision for the reserves incurred but not yet analyzed and reported to us due to a two quarter lag in reporting. These changes reflect a difference between our estimate of the lag incurred but not reported and the amounts reported by the NCCI in the quarter. The change in ultimate loss estimates for all other accident years was insignificant.

 

Salary and Employee Benefits and Other Administrative Expenses

 

Salary and employee benefits for the three months ended March 31, 2007, increased $164,000, or 1.2%, to $13.5 million, from $13.4 million for the comparable period in 2006. This increase primarily reflects a slight increase in staffing levels in comparison to 2006, partially offset by a decrease in variable compensation. The decrease in variable compensation reflects the increase in our targeted return on equity.

 

Other administrative expenses decreased $422,000, or 5.3%, to $7.5 million, from $7.9 million for the comparable period in 2006. This decrease in other administrative expenses is primarily related to a decrease in policyholder dividends. In addition, there were various decreases in other general operating expenses in comparison to 2006.

 

Salary and employee benefits and other administrative expenses include both corporate overhead and the holding company expenses included in the non-allocated expenses of our segment information.

 

Interest Expense

 

Our interest expense increased slightly in comparison to 2006. Interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2007, increased $100,000, or 7.2%, to $1.5 million, from $1.4 million for the comparable period in 2006. Interest expense is primarily attributable to our debentures, which are described within the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis, as well as our line of credit. The average outstanding balance on our line of credit during the three months ending March 31, 2007, was $9.6 million, compared to $8.3 million for the same period in 2006. The average interest rate, excluding the debentures, was approximately 6.7% in 2007, compared to 6.2% in 2006.

 

Income Taxes

 

Our income tax expense, which includes both federal and state taxes, for the three months ended March 31, 2007, was $3.1 million, or 31.3% of income before taxes. For the same period last year, we reflected an income tax expense of $2.8 million, or 33.6% of income before taxes. The decrease in our tax rate from 2006 to 2007 primarily reflects a higher level of tax exempt securities in our investment portfolio, slightly offset by a higher level of income within our fee-based operations, which are taxed at a 35% Federal tax rate. Our tax exempt securities as a percentage of total invested assets were 45.3% and 36.8% at March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

 

Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005

 

Our gross written premium was down slightly in comparison to 2005. This slight decrease was primarily the result of exiting a limited number of small programs that no longer met our pricing standards, therefore reducing

premium volume in certain limited programs in which pricing competition dictates that we write less volume and maintaining pricing discipline throughout the organization. In addition, this decrease was the result of a reduction in audit related premiums. We continue to follow pricing guidelines mandated by our corporate underwriting guidelines. Overall, our year-to-date rate change was relatively flat. In 2006, there were anticipated mandatory rate decreases in workers’ compensation in some states, but for the most part those were offset by benefit changes that should lower incurred losses. We implemented several new programs in 2006 and continue to be selective on new program implementation by focusing on those that meet our underwriting guidelines and have a history of profitability.

 

Our net income improved $4.1 million, or 23.0%, to $22.0 million, or $0.75 per diluted share, in 2006, from net income of $17.9 million, or $0.60 per diluted share, in 2005. As previously indicated, this improvement is primarily the result of our selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy. In addition, during 2005 we increased our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties, which favorably impacted net earned premiums and net income for 2006, compared to 2005. Growth in our fee-for-service programs also contributed to the overall improvement in net income in comparison to 2005.

 

Our revenues increased $14.2 million, or 4.7%, to $318.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $304.0 million for the comparable period in 2005. This increase reflects a $4.9 million, or 2.0%, increase in net earned premiums. The increase in net earned premiums is the result of our selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy, as well as the favorable impact from an increase in our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties effective in 2005. Offsetting the overall increase in net earned premiums for the year ended December 31, 2006, was a reduction in audit related premiums in comparison to 2005. The increase in revenue was also the result of an overall increase in fee-for-service revenue, primarily as a result of new managed programs. In addition, the increase in revenue reflects a $4.1 million increase in investment income, primarily due to an increase in average invested assets as a result of improved cashflow from favorable underwriting results, an increase in the duration of our reserves, and proceeds from the junior subordinated debentures issued in the third quarter of 2005. The increase in investment income is also the result of a slight increase in yield.

 

Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004

 

Our net income improved $3.8 million, or 27.4%, to $17.9 million, or $0.60 per diluted share, in 2005, from net income of $14.1 million, or $0.48 per diluted share, in 2004. This improvement was primarily the result of our controlled growth of premiums written, the impact from rate increases in 2004 and 2005, overall expense initiatives, and the continued leveraging of fixed costs. In addition, we increased our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties, which favorably impacted net earned premiums and net income. These improvements manifested, despite the favorable effect in the third quarter of 2004, from the acceleration of $3.5 million in deferred revenue, less approximately $500,000 in expenses and $1.0 million in taxes, relating to the early termination of a specific multi-state claims run-off contract. Net income was also favorably impacted by approximately $814,000 from profit-sharing commissions received in 2005, partially offset by continuing expenses primarily related to implementation and compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In addition, net income was favorably impacted as a result of a $386,000 increase in the deferred tax asset relating to the increase in the statutory federal tax rate from 34% to 35%.

 

Our revenues increased $33.7 million, or 12.5%, to $304.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $270.3 million for the comparable period in 2004. This increase reflected a $35.5 million, or 16.5%, increase in net earned premiums. The increase in net earned premiums was the result of our controlled growth in written premiums from various existing programs and new programs implemented in 2004, a higher retention on certain reinsurance treaties effective in 2005, and the impact of an overall 8.4% rate increase in 2004. Partially offsetting these increases in revenue was an approximate $5.5 million decrease in managed fee revenue, which was primarily the result of an acceleration of $3.5 million in deferred claim fee revenue recognized in the third quarter of 2004. This comparative decrease in managed fee revenue in 2005 was due to the acceleration of deferred claim fee revenue in 2004, as the result of an earlier than anticipated termination of two limited duration administrative services and multi-state claims run-off contracts. These contracts had been terminated by the liquidator for the companies during the third quarter of 2004. Therefore, the revenues that we anticipated earning in the first nine months of 2005 were

accelerated into the third quarter of 2004. In addition, the increase in revenue reflected a $3.1 million increase in investment income, primarily the result of an increase in average invested assets and a slight increase in yield.

 

Specialty Risk Management Operations

 

The following table sets forth the revenues and results from operations for our specialty risk management operations (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.  Our revenues from specialty risk management operations increased $12.0 million, or 4.1%, to $306.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $294.5 million for the comparable period in 2005.

 

Net earned premiums increased $4.9 million, or 2.0%, to $254.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $250.0 million in the comparable period in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of selective growth consistent with our corporate underwriting guidelines and our controls over price adequacy, as well as the favorable impact from an increase in our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties. Offsetting these increases was an overall decrease in audit related premiums in comparison to 2005, reflecting improvements in the estimation of exposures during the underwriting cycle.

 

Management fees increased $2.0 million, or 11.8%, to $18.7 million, for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $16.7 million for the comparable period in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of a Florida-based program implemented in the second quarter of 2005. In addition, this increase is the result of growth in a specific New England-based program. Also contributing to the overall increase in management fees was the recognition of $250,000 from a profit-based revenue sharing payment related to a specific managed program.

 

Claim fees increased $1.7 million, or 23.4%, to $8.8 million, from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of our 2006 entry into the self-insured workers’ compensation market in Nevada. In addition, this increase is the result of increases in revenue related to a specific Minnesota-based program, as well as a Florida-based program, which was implemented in the second quarter of 2005.

 

Net investment income increased $4.1 million, or 22.8%, to $22.1 million in 2006, from $18.0 million in 2005. Average invested assets increased $69.6 million, or 16.4%, to $493.9 million in 2006, from $424.3 million in 2005. The increase in average invested assets reflects cash flows from underwriting activities primarily from favorable underwriting results and an increase in the duration of our reserves. The increase in the duration of our reserves reflects the impact of our public entity excess program, which was implemented at the end of 2003. This program

has a longer duration than the average reserves on our remaining programs and is a larger proportion of reserves. In addition, the $19.4 million in net proceeds received from capital raised in 2005 through the issuances of debentures increased average invested assets. The average investment yield for 2006 was 4.47%, compared to 4.24% in 2005. The current pre-tax book yield was 4.35%. The current after-tax book yield was 3.28%, compared to 3.06% in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of the shift in our investment portfolio to tax-exempt investments. The duration of the investment portfolio is 3.9 years.

 

Our specialty risk management operations generated pre-tax income of $38.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, compared to pre-tax income of $29.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. This increase in pre-tax income demonstrates a continued improvement in underwriting results as a result of our controlled growth in premium volume and our continued focus on leveraging of fixed costs. The GAAP combined ratio was 96.8% for the year ended December 31, 2006, compared to 98.7% for the comparable period in 2005.

 

Net losses and loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”) decreased $5.2 million, or 3.5%, to $146.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $151.5 million for the same period in 2005. Our loss and LAE ratio improved 2.9 percentage points to 62.3% for the year ended December 31, 2006, from 65.2% for the same period in 2005. This ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and LAE in relation to net earned premiums. The accident year loss ratio remained flat at 63.4% for 2006, compared to 63.3% in 2005. The favorable development in our loss ratio was primarily the result of improvement in frequency and claim settlements within the professional liability line of business. In addition, workers’ compensation residual market experience improved as a result of lower market share assessments and lower loss reserves on the industry pooled experience. Both 2006 and 2005, were adversely impacted by a single large workers’ compensation claim. The increase was $1.5 million and $900,000 in 2006 and 2005, respectively. Excluding the adverse impact of this claim, overall workers’ compensation reflected improvement in claim settlements relative to their collective case reserves. The experience within the general liability line of business also improved due to favorable case reserve settlements in 2006, in comparison to 2005. These improvements were partially offset by a single property claim of $1.9 million within a California-based agricultural program. Allowances within other reserve categories, collectively, did not contribute to the development in 2006, compared to 2005 where we experienced approximately $1.3 million in adverse development related to allowances on reinsurance recoverables. Additional discussion of our reserve activity is described below within the Other Items  Reserves section.

 

Our expense ratio for the year ended December 31, 2006 was 34.5%, compared to 33.5% in 2005. This ratio is the unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net earned premiums. The increase in our expense ratio in comparison to 2005 reflects a reduction in an accrual for estimated profit-based ceding commissions on an excess reinsurance treaty for a specific commercial transportation program. This decrease was the result of unfavorable loss development on a limited number of excess of loss claims from prior accident years and added $1.6 million to our expenses, or 0.6 percentage points to our expense ratio for the year, as compared to a favorable impact on the 2005 expense ratio of $1.1 million, or 0.5 percentage points. As of December 31, 2006, the remaining accrual was less than $150,000; therefore, we do not anticipate any further unfavorable adjustments. Offsetting this increase in the expense ratio was a reduction in insurance related assessments primarily related to the guaranty fund in Florida and Nevada.

 

Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.  Our revenues from specialty risk management operations increased $32.7 million, or 12.5%, to $294.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $261.8 million for the comparable period in 2004.

 

Net earned premiums increased $35.5 million, or 16.5%, to $250.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $214.5 million in the comparable period in 2004. This increase primarily reflected our controlled growth of premiums written, as well as a favorable impact from an increase in our retention levels on certain reinsurance treaties.

 

Management fees increased $488,000, or 3.0%, to $16.8 million, for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $16.3 million for the comparable period in 2004. Management fees were impacted by an anticipated shift in fee-for-service revenue previously generated from a third party contract to internally generated fee revenue from a specific renewal rights agreement that is eliminated upon consolidation. Due to the earlier than anticipated termination of this third party contract, the revenues we anticipated earning in 2005 were accelerated into the third quarter of 2004.

Excluding revenue generated from this third party contract, management fee revenue increased approximately $1.7 million, or 11.1%, in comparison to 2004. This increase was primarily the result of a new Florida-based program implemented in the second quarter of 2005, as well as growth in a specific existing New England-based program.

 

Claim fees decreased $6.1 million, or 46.1%, to $7.1 million, from $13.2 million for the comparable period in 2004. This decrease reflected a similar anticipated shifting of revenue previously generated from a multi-state claims run-off service contract, to internally generated fee revenue from a specific renewal rights agreement that is eliminated upon consolidation. Also impacting this comparison was the effect of the earlier than anticipated termination of the third party contract, which caused the revenues we anticipated earning in 2005 to be accelerated into the third quarter of 2004. Excluding revenue generated from this third party contract, claim fee revenue would have remained relatively consistent in comparison to 2004.

 

Net investment income increased $3.1 million, or 20.5%, to $18.0 million in 2005, from $14.9 million in 2004. Average invested assets increased $65.6 million, or 18.3%, to $424.3 million in 2005, from $358.7 million in 2004. The increase in average invested assets reflected cash flows from underwriting activities and growth in gross written premiums during 2004 and 2005, as well as net proceeds from capital raised in 2004 and 2005 through the issuances of debentures. The average investment yield for 2005 was 4.24%, compared to 4.16% in 2004. The current pre-tax book yield was 4.17%. The current after-tax book yield was 3.06%, compared to 2.85% in 2004.

 

Our specialty risk management operations generated pre-tax income of $29.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to pre-tax income of $23.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. This increase in pre-tax income demonstrated a continued improvement in underwriting results as a result of our controlled growth in premium volume and our continued focus on leveraging of fixed costs. Offsetting a portion of this improvement, was a $3.0 million pre-tax benefit, recognized in the third quarter of 2004, from the previously mentioned acceleration of revenue recognition, net of expenses, relating to the termination of a specific multi-state claims run-off contract. The GAAP combined ratio was 98.7% for the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to 101.4% for the comparable period in 2004.

 

Net losses and loss adjustment expenses increased $15.6 million, or 11.5%, to $151.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $135.9 million for the same period in 2004. Our loss and LAE ratio improved 2.7 percentage points to 65.2% for the year ended December 31, 2005, from 67.9% for the same period in 2004. This ratio is the unconsolidated net loss and LAE in relation to net earned premiums. The accident year loss ratio improved 2.5 percentage points to 63.3% for the year ended December 31, 2005, from 65.8% for the same period in 2004. This overall improvement in the loss ratio reflects the impact of earned premiums from the controlled growth of profitable programs which had favorable underwriting experience, as well as our intended shift in our mix of business between workers’ compensation and general liability. Historically, the general liability line of business has a lower loss ratio and a higher external producer commission. In addition, the loss ratio was favorably impacted as a result of efficiencies realized in our claims handling activities. These improvements were partially offset by a single large workers’ compensation claim of $900,000, as well as an increase to an exposure allowance of $1.5 million, specific to reinsurance recoverables for a discontinued surety program and a discontinued workers’ compensation program. Although we increased our allowance for these specific exposures, the actual exposures did not increase.

 

Our expense ratio for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 was 33.5%. This ratio is the unconsolidated policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses in relation to net earned premiums. Our expense ratio was impacted by an anticipated increase in gross external commissions, due to the shift in our mix of business between workers’ compensation and general liability. The general liability line of business has a higher external producer commission rate and, as previously indicated, a lower loss ratio. Offsetting these increases to the expense ratio was the impact of the leveraging of fixed costs.

Agency Operations

 

The following table sets forth the revenues and results from operations from our agency operations (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.  Our revenue from agency operations, which consists primarily of agency commission revenue, increased $1.0 million, or 8.7%, to $12.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, from $11.3 million for the comparable period in 2005. This increase is primarily the result of the November 2005 acquisition of a Florida-based retail agency and an increase in profit sharing commissions in comparison to 2005. Offsetting these increases was a decrease in commission revenue as a result of a reduction in premium on client renewals.

 

Our agency operations generated pre-tax income, after the allocation of corporate overhead, of $3.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, compared to $3.3 million for the comparable period in 2005. This decrease in pre-tax income in comparison to 2005 is primarily the result of a slight increase in operating expenses coupled with the decrease in commission revenue noted above as a result of the reduction in premium on client renewals, offset by the favorable impact from the Florida-based retail agency acquisition.

 

Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.  Our revenue from agency operations, which consists primarily of agency commission revenue, increased $1.5 million, or 15.3%, to $11.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $9.8 million for the comparable period in 2004. This increase was primarily the result of profit sharing commissions received in the first and third quarter of 2005. In addition, the agency operations experienced an increase in new business and renewal retentions in comparison to 2004, which was partially offset by a reduction in renewal rates.

 

Our agency operations generated pre-tax income, after the allocation of corporate overhead, of $3.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to $2.3 million for the comparable period in 2004. The improvement in the pre-tax margin was primarily attributable to the overall increase in commissions and leveraging of fixed costs. Excluding fixed costs and the allocation of corporate overhead, all other expenses remained relatively consistent.

Reserves

 

At December 31, 2006, our best estimate for the ultimate liability for loss and LAE reserves, net of reinsurance recoverables, was $302.7 million. We established a reasonable range of reserves of approximately $280.3 million to $318.1 million. This range was established primarily by considering the various indications derived from standard actuarial techniques and other appropriate reserve considerations. The following table sets forth this range by line of business (in thousands):

 

 

 

 

For the year ended December 31, 2006, we reported a decrease in net ultimate loss estimates for accident years 2005 and prior of $2.7 million, or 1.0% of $271.4 million of net loss and LAE reserves at December 31, 2005. The decrease in net ultimate loss estimates reflected revisions in the estimated reserves as a result of actual claims activity in calendar year 2006 that differed from the projected activity. There were no significant changes in the key assumptions utilized in the analysis and calculations of our reserves during 2006 and 2005. The major components of this change in ultimate loss estimates are as follows (in thousands):