巴菲特致股东的信（1982年）④保险业情况

Insurance Industry Conditions

We show below an updated table of the industry statistics we utilized in last year’s annual report. Its message is clear: underwriting results in 1983 will not be a sight for the squeamish.

保险业情况

下表显示的是去年我们曾引用过，经过更新后的产业统计数字，其所传达的讯息相当明显，我们将不会对1983年的承保结果感到吃惊。

The Best’s data reflect the experience of practically the entire industry, including stock, mutual and reciprocal companies. The combined ratio represents total operating and loss costs as compared to revenue from premiums; a ratio below 100 indicates an underwriting profit, and one above 100 indicates a loss.

数据正说明了目前整个所面临到的状况，综合比率系表示经营成本加上理赔损失除以保费收入的比率，若比率小于100%则表示有承保利益，反之则有承保损失。

For reasons outlined in last year’s report, as long as the annual gain in industry premiums written falls well below 10%, you can expect the underwriting picture in the next year to deteriorate. This will be true even at today’s lower general rate of inflation. With the number of policies increasing annually, medical inflation far exceeding general inflation, and concepts of insured liability broadening, it is highly unlikely that yearly increases in insured losses will fall much below 10%.

就如同去年我们所说的一样，若承销保费年增率低于10%，你就会发现隔年的承保结果恶化，即使像通膨率相对较低的今日也是如此，随着保单日益成长，医疗费用上涨的速度远高于一般物价，加上保险责任日益扩大的影响，承保损失将很难压低到10%以下。

You should be further aware that the 1982 combined ratio of 109.5 represents a “best case” estimate. In a given year, it is possible for an insurer to show almost any profit number it wishes, particularly if it (1) writes “long-tail” business (coverage where current costs can be only estimated, because claim payments are long delayed), (2) has been adequately reserved in the past, or (3) is growing very rapidly. There are indications that several large insurers opted in 1982 for obscure accounting and reserving maneuvers that masked significant deterioration in their underlying businesses. In insurance, as elsewhere, the reaction of weak managements to weak operations is often weak accounting. (“It’s difficult for an empty sack to stand upright.”)

大家必须有所认知1982年的综合比率109.5已是相当乐观的估计，在以前年代保险公司几乎可依自身喜好来调整年度获利，只要(1)承销长期保单(Long-tail)因为理赔成本多采用估计；(2)以前年度提存有适当准备；或(3)业务成长快速。有迹象显示有几家大型保险公司倾向以模糊的会计与挪动准备的方式来掩饰其本业不佳的情况。保险业，跟其它行业一样，不良的经营阶层对不良的营运通常最直接的反应就是不良的帐务，俗语说:“你很难让一个空沙包站得直挺挺的”。

The great majority of managements, however, try to play it straight. But even managements of integrity may subconsciously be less willing in poor profit years to fully recognize adverse loss trends. Industry statistics indicate some deterioration in loss reserving practices during 1982 and the true combined ratio is likely to be modestly worse than indicated by our table.

当然大部份的经营阶层都尽力按正正当当的游戏规则玩，但即使是正直的管理当局在面对获利不佳的情况时，下意识多多少少也不会愿意完全承认走下坡的窘境，产业统计资料指出在1982年对于提列损失准备方面有恶化迹象，而实际的综合比率可能会比表列数更差一点。

The conventional wisdom is that 1983 or 1984 will see the worst of underwriting experience and then, as in the past, the “cycle” will move, significantly and steadily, toward better results. We disagree because of a pronounced change in the competitive environment, hard to see for many years but now quite visible.

一般认为在1983或1984年会到谷底，然后产业循环会如同过去经验一般缓步稳定地向上，但由于一项明显的改变(这种改变已许多年未见，而如今却重现)使我们抱持不同的看法。

To understand the change, we need to look at some major factors that affect levels of corporate profitability generally. Businesses in industries with both substantial over-capacity and a “commodity” product (undifferentiated in any customer-important way by factors such as performance, appearance, service support, etc.) are prime candidates for profit troubles. These may be escaped, true, if prices or costs are administered in some manner and thereby insulated at least partially from normal market forces. This administration can be carried out (a) legally through government intervention (until recently, this category included pricing for truckers and deposit costs for financial institutions), (b) illegally through collusion, or (c) “extra-legally” through OPEC-style foreign cartelization (with tag-along benefits for domestic non-cartel operators).

对此我们必须探究几项影响企业获利的重要因素才能了解这种改变，一般来说若企业处在产业面临供给过剩且为产品一般商品化的情形(在整体表现、外观、售后服务等都无差异化)时，便极有可能发生获利警讯，当然若价格或成本在某些情况下(例如透过政府立法干预、非法勾结或国际性联合垄断如OPEC)能获得控制或可稍微免除自由市场竞争。

If, however, costs and prices are determined by full-bore competition, there is more than ample capacity, and the buyer cares little about whose product or distribution services he uses, industry economics are almost certain to be unexciting. They may well be disastrous.

否则若客户不在乎其所采用的产品或通路服务由谁提供，成本与价格系由完全竞争来决定，如此产业铁定会面临悲惨的下场。

Hence the constant struggle of every vendor to establish and emphasize special qualities of product or service. This works with candy bars (customers buy by brand name, not by asking for a “two-ounce candy bar”) but doesn’t work with sugar (how often do you hear, “I’ll have a cup of coffee with cream and C & H sugar, please”).

这也是为什么所有的厂商皆努力强调并建立本身产品或服务的差异性，这种作法在糖果有用(消费者会指明品牌)而砂糖却没有用(难道你听过有人会说:“我的咖啡要加奶精和某某牌的砂糖”)。

In many industries, differentiation simply can’t be made meaningful. A few producers in such industries may consistently do well if they have a cost advantage that is both wide and sustainable. By definition such exceptions are few, and, in many industries, are non-existent. For the great majority of companies selling “commodity”products, a depressing equation of business economics prevails: persistent over-capacity without administered prices (or costs) equals poor profitability.

在许多产业就是无法作到差异化，有些生产者能因具成本优势而表现杰出，然在定义上这种情况极少或甚至不存在，所以对大部份销售已完全商品化的公司来说，不可避免的结局便是，持续的产能过剩无法控制价格滑落导致获利不佳。

Of course, over-capacity may eventually self-correct, either as capacity shrinks or demand expands. Unfortunately for the participants, such corrections often are long delayed. When they finally occur, the rebound to prosperity frequently produces a pervasive enthusiasm for expansion that, within a few years, again creates over-capacity and a new profitless environment. In other words, nothing fails like success.

当然产能过剩会因产能缩减或需求增加而自我修正，而不幸的是这种修正的过程却是缓慢而痛苦的，当产业好不容易面临反弹时，却又是一窝蜂全面扩张的开始，不到几年又必须面对先前的窘况。

What finally determines levels of long-term profitability in such industries is the ratio of supply-tight to supply-ample years. Frequently that ratio is dismal. (It seems as if the most recent supply-tight period in our textile business - it occurred some years back - lasted the better part of a morning.)

而最后决定产业长期获利情况的是供给吃紧与供给过剩年度的比率，通常这种比率很小，(以我们在纺织业的经验来说，供给吃紧的情况要追溯到许多年以前，且大约仅维持不到一个早上的时间)。

In some industries, however, capacity-tight conditions can last a long time. Sometimes actual growth in demand will outrun forecasted growth for an extended period. In other cases, adding capacity requires very long lead times because complicated manufacturing facilities must be planned and built.

在某一些产业，供给吃紧的情况却可以维持上好一段期间，有时实际需求的成长甚至超过当初所预期，而要增加产能因涉及复杂的规划与建厂而须有相当的前置期。

But in the insurance business, to return to that subject, capacity can be instantly created by capital plus an underwriter’s willingness to sign his name. (Even capital is less important in a world in which state-sponsored guaranty funds protect many policyholders against insurer insolvency.) Under almost all conditions except that of fear for survival - produced, perhaps, by a stock market debacle or a truly major natural disaster - the insurance industry operates under the competitive sword of substantial overcapacity. Generally, also, despite heroic attempts to do otherwise, the industry sells a relatively undifferentiated commodity-type product. (Many insureds, including the managers of large businesses, do not even know the names of their insurers.) Insurance, therefore, would seem to be a textbook case of an industry usually faced with the deadly combination of excess capacity and a “commodity” product.

回归正题谈到保险业，供给量能马上提高只要业者增加点资本(有些时候由于州政府立法保障保户免于保险公司倒闭风险，甚至可不需要增加资本)，在绝大数的情况下，(除了发生股市大崩盘或自然界的大天灾)保险业皆处于过度竞争的环境下经营，通常来说尽管勇于尝试多变化，业者所销售的保单多属于无差异化的一般商品(许多保户包含大公司的经理人在内，甚至不知道自己所投保的是那一家保险公司)，所以保险业在教科书当中一般被归类为面临供给过剩且产品一般商品化死胡同的艰困行业。

Why, then, was underwriting, despite the existence of cycles, generally profitable over many decades? (From 1950 through 1970, the industry combined ratio averaged 99.0. allowing all investment income plus 1% of premiums to flow through to profits.) The answer lies primarily in the historic methods of regulation and distribution. For much of this century, a large portion of the industry worked, in effect, within a legal quasi-administered pricing system fostered by insurance regulators. While price competition existed, it was not pervasive among the larger companies. The main competition was for agents, who were courted via various non-price-related strategies.

那么为什么保险业即使在面临这种情况下，数十年来仍能有所获利?(在1950年到1970年间产业平均的综合比率为99.0，使得公司获利除投资收益外，还外加1%的承销利益，答案在于传统的规范与行销方式，这个世纪以来整个产业系依照业者所掌控的近乎法定管制价格机制在运作，虽然竞价行为确实存在，但在大型保险业间却不普遍，主要的竞争系在争取经纪人方面，且多用各种与价格无关的方式去争取。

For the giants of the industry, most rates were set through negotiations between industry “bureaus” (or through companies acting in accord with their recommendations) and state regulators. Dignified haggling occurred, but it was between company and regulator rather than between company and customer. When the dust settled, Giant A charged the same price as Giant B - and both companies and agents were prohibited by law from cutting such filed rates.

而大型业者的费率主要系透过产业公会与州政府管制当局协调(或依照公司所建议)来订定，讨价还价是难免的，但那是业者与政府间，而不是业者与客户间的行为。当争论结束，公司甲的价格可能与公司乙的完全一致，而法律也禁止业者或经纪人再杀价竞争。

The company-state negotiated prices included specific profit allowances and, when loss data indicated that current prices were unprofitable, both company managements and state regulators expected that they would act together to correct the situation. Thus, most of the pricing actions of the giants of the industry were “gentlemanly”, predictable, and profit-producing. Of prime importance - and in contrast to the way most of the business world operated - insurance companies could legally price their way to profitability even in the face of substantial over-capacity.

业者与州政府协议订定的价格保障业者的获利，而当资料显示现有价格不敷成本时，政府还会与业者协调共同努力改善损失的状况，故产业大部份定价的举动皆能确保公司有利可图，最重要的是不同于一般商业社会运作的习惯，保险公司即使在超额供给的情况下，仍能合法地调整价格以确保公司的获利。

That day is gone. Although parts of the old structure remain, far more than enough new capacity exists outside of that structure to force all parties, old and new, to respond. The new capacity uses various methods of distribution and is not reluctant to use price as a prime competitive weapon. Indeed, it relishes that use. In the process, customers have learned that insurance is no longer a one-price business. They won’t forget.

但好景不常，虽然旧有的制度仍在但组织外的资金入续投入市场，迫使所有的参与者，不论新旧皆被迫响应，新进者利用各种不同的行销管道且毫不犹豫地使用价格作为竞争的工具，而确实他们也善用这项武器，在过程中消费者了解到保险不再是不二价的行业，而关于这点他们永远记得。

Future profitability of the industry will be determined by current competitive characteristics, not past ones. Many managers have been slow to recognize this. It’s not only generals that prefer to fight the last war. Most business and investment analysis also comes from the rear-view mirror. It seems clear to us, however, that only one condition will allow the insurance industry to achieve significantly improved underwriting results. That is the same condition that will allow better results for the aluminum, copper, or corn producer - a major narrowing of the gap between demand and supply.

产业未来的获利性取决于现今而非过去竞争的特性，但许多经理人很难体认到这一点，不是只有将军才会战到最后一兵一卒，大部份的企业与投资分析都是后知后觉，但我们却看得很透澈，惟有一种情况才能改善保险业承保获利的状况，这和铝、铜或玉米生产业者相同，就是缩小供给与需求之间的差距。

Unfortunately, there can be no surge in demand for insurance policies comparable to one that might produce a market tightness in copper or aluminum. Rather, the supply of available insurance coverage must be curtailed. “Supply”, in this context, is mental rather than physical: plants or companies need not be shut; only the willingness of underwriters to sign their names need be curtailed.

而不幸的是不像铝、铜，保单的需求不会因市场紧峭而一下子就大幅增加，所以相对的，须从紧缩供给面来下手，而所谓的供给实际上是偏向心理面而非实质面的，不须要关闭厂房或公司，只要业者克制一下签下保单的冲动即可。

This contraction will not happen because of generally poor profit levels. Bad profits produce much hand-wringing and finger-pointing. But they do not lead major sources of insurance capacity to turn their backs on very large chunks of business, thereby sacrificing market share and industry significance.

而这种抑制绝不会是因为获利不佳，因为不赚钱虽然会使业者犹豫再三但却不愿冒着丧失市场占有率与业界地位而放弃大笔的生意。

Instead, major capacity withdrawals require a shock factor such as a natural or financial “megadisaster”. One might occur tomorrow - or many years from now. The insurance business - even taking investment income into account - will not be particularly profitable in the meantime.

反而是需要自然的或金融上的大风暴才会使业者大幅缩手，而这种情况或许明天就会发生，也或许要等上好几年，到时即使把投资收益列入考量，保险业也很难有获利的情况。

When supply ultimately contracts, large amounts of business will be available for the few with large capital capacity, a willingness to commit it, and an in-place distribution system. We would expect great opportunities for our insurance subsidiaries at such a time.

当供给真正的紧缩时，大笔的业务将会捧上门给幸存的大型业者，他们有能力也有通路能够吃下所有生意，而我们的保险子公司已准备好这一天的到来。

During 1982, our insurance underwriting deteriorated far more than did the industry’s. From a profit position well above average, we, slipped to a performance modestly below average. The biggest swing was in National Indemnity’s traditional coverages. Lines that have been highly profitable for us in the past are now priced at levels that guarantee underwriting losses. In 1983 we expect our insurance group to record an average performance in an industry in which average is very poor.

在1982年我们的保险部门承销成绩恶化的比同业还严重，从获利优于同业滑落成同业平均之下，主要的变动在于国民保险传统的承保范围，我们以往获利颇佳的部份，价格下跌到保险公司铁定赔钱的惨况，而展望明年，我们预期表现将与同业水准相当，不过所谓的水准将会很惨。

Two of our stars, Milt Thornton at Cypress and Floyd Taylor at Kansas Fire and Casualty, continued their outstanding records of producing an underwriting profit every year since joining us. Both Milt and Floyd simply are incapable of being average. They maintain a passionately proprietary attitude toward their operations and have developed a business culture centered upon unusual cost-consciousness and customer service. It shows on their scorecards.

我们两位明星，Cypress的Milt Thornton与Kansas的Floyd Taylor表现持续看好，维持一惯的积极态度并建立在节省成本与客户至上的企业文化上，这明白显现在他们的得分记录上。

During 1982, parent company responsibility for most of our insurance operations was given to Mike Goldberg. Planning, recruitment, and monitoring all have shown significant improvement since Mike replaced me in this role.

在1982年母公司负责管理保险子公司的责任交给Mike Goldberg，自从Mike从我手中接棒后，不论在计划、招募与监控上皆也明显进步。

GEICO continues to be managed with a zeal for efficiency and value to the customer that virtually guarantees unusual success. Jack Byrne and Bill Snyder are achieving the most elusive of human goals - keeping things simple and remembering what you set out to do. In Lou Simpson, additionally, GEICO has the best investment manager in the property-casualty business. We are happy with every aspect of this operation. GEICO is a magnificent illustration of the high-profit exception we described earlier in discussing commodity industries with over-capacity - a company with a wide and sustainable cost advantage. Our 35% interest in GEICO represents about $250 million of premium volume, an amount considerably greater than all of the direct volume we produce.