ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited (ICICIGI) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

When we see the mix between [indiscernible] is that [indiscernible]

Absolutely. So if you look at for us as a company as a whole, we used to be roughly about 50-50 in terms of new and renewal. And this during COVID, obviously, there was nothing pretty much there in terms of new, I mean, the proportion was significantly lower. Couple of years back, the proportion came to about 1/3 and 2/3. 1/3 was new and renewals are about 2/3. As we speak, new will be almost 40% to 45% in the range On an incremental basis, 40% to 45% will be new and the risk will be renewal. So clearly, directionally, you can clearly see the proportion of, let's say, new vehicles contributing to the overall numbers.

And in terms of this dilute pricing is that going to be...

[ Obviously ] That's always very helpful. That's what we've always been saying. In the past, we have already said the other challenge of a possible channel conflict, where we would not have been able to price differentially even for whatever reason, one wanted to kind of do that. So this change in, let's say, risk-based pricing just happened at the point of origin. It's a great positive result. And that's the reason why possibly we are able to kind of reselect portfolios, which we think -- and that does not look at only just one element of pricing. There are many factors that goes on in the point of sale. And hence, the actual rate has also been differential pricing. And that's the reason if you recollect -- over the last, I would say, 2 years, what we have been talking about is to also look at segments, which are relative, let's say, older vehicles. It typically comes with a slightly high cost of LR, primarily because the pricing for that particular segment is slightly lower. So hence, it's a high LR or but low expensive management-based sourcing segments, which even from [indiscernible] perspective where is where we rashing. The relative cost that you end up paying upfront is slightly lower than what you would end up doing at the point of sale.

And this is already in place?

Already in place.

In cars?

Yes, Yes. It's already that's in place [indiscernible]

When we see the [indiscernible]

It's the last 12 to 18 months, pretty much in place.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. The cost of insurance, if you buy from the dealer as compared to not buying any insurance and...

[indiscernible] between segment to segment because you have to ultimately look at it from the combined ratio stand.

No, I'm saying from a previous point of view.

That's what I'm saying. All segments would have to be looked at in the context of the company. So Maruti Alto, combined ratio is something that you will look at vis-a-vis, let's say, Maruti Swift, for both new as well as a renewal. If you look at from combined perspective. The combined is viable, then you look at writing that segment. The challenge is the part for us was we could not price differential. Whatever I have to kind of price or a segment that I wanted to source through the agency. For the same prices what if, that was available at the point of dealership.

What's the difference in terms of pricing?

It would be anywhere between 10% to 15%. Whether again that could vary between segment to segment. But on an average, [indiscernible] Look at it, it's about [ 10% to 15% ]. That's a huge differentiation. But more than, let's say, the percentage difference, the ability for us to kind of price for the different segments or different channels of [indiscernible]. That's what we want.

So one is discrete pricing based on the customer profile, right?

I mean the asset profile because still we don't underwrite the customer. We underwrite the asset. Again, KYC is something that has got introduced [indiscernible] only from 1st of January [indiscernible] Until now on motor, we have been underwriting more the vehicle as compared to the customer. But you will have data of the owner of the vehicle and...

That's the biggest challenge. KYC was never imposed.

But if someone else has a IRR and a policy [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] for KYC.

But you were never asking any documents [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] getting, sometimes they were not even [ bigger ]. And the latter part used to be the challenge for most of the industry participants. We never used to pay the customer [indiscernible] . But having said that, over the last 2, 3 years, at least on the non dealer-based sourcings that we have been doing, we have been trying to exactly do what you have been -- what you've just mentioned, which is to look at any kind of a proxy to see whether, for example, like we look at your credit scoring, and see whether there's a correlation between someone having a very high [indiscernible] quarters pretty experienced so far as losses are. What you have been finding over the last 2, 3 years, basis, some of this experimentation is Ariel has a positive progress. Someone is running a very high credit score typically in terms of delivering orders On that basis, we will look at saying, [indiscernible]

Question was what is the customer asset base and other is the channel [indiscernible] on direct insurance [indiscernible] . cheaper than, let's say, any...

That's what we keep saying. In the Indian market, are we going to completely transition to a credit model? The answer for us, as we speak, at least for the foreseeable future for us, we don't see that now. And this often gets asked us -- asked to us even 2 years, 3 years back. Our [indiscernible] There may be a few handful set of impound customers who may possibly want to go and buy things completely digital.

[indiscernible] customer-driven now the regulator is also freakish?

What the regulator is thinking about is to kind of create a common platform for, let's say, customers, distributors and insurance companies to cover that. Again, we'll have to see as to how does it kind of play out. And at the end of the day, everything boils down to the combined issue was [ printed ]. If the risk that I'm selecting, whether I do it through the platform [indiscernible] say, the OEM/leadership channel or even let's say if I'm going into the NCMA distribution. [indiscernible] I am looking at it from a combined standpoint. And mind you, we will once see how the platform plays out, though we are kind of extremely positive on that. But even before, let's say, the regulatory induced platform, the [indiscernible] always had a multichannel approach. We have capability of sourcing businesses through OEM, through agency and as well around website SP1.

So that -- in the setup in the website, the old website can you achieve them by burning somethings? [indiscernible]

If you go and try to acquire a customer, it's never cheap. The kind of -- so call it on the lighter side, the amount of money that you're going to play to Google/Facebook of the world in so far as advertising spends are concerned. It's never cheap. So -- but having said that, we would again look at it in the context of over longer term and see whether the businesses are making profitable sense or not. But our experience would we kind of track customer buying behavior. All that just look at the sheer convenience for a customer who is going to the OEM or it's in the dealership network. Will that customer be willing to go and buy policy on the website [indiscernible] at least for the majority of them because he or she is going there to buy an asset, they're not going there to buy [indiscernible] As you said, maybe a very handful set of reform customers may be willing to kind of [indiscernible] to website and possibly try and get insurance. But otherwise, the customer goes there to the leadership networks. As a part of the price list, insurance is one of the companies. Having said that, capability that you have to create is to make the process of that insurance buying at the point of dealership extend [indiscernible]. So we don't see some things completely changing at least for the very first year of policy purchase. Many times as we have been explaining, the dealer is able to hold down to the customer even for the first or the second [indiscernible] . So again, we don't see much of a transition happening. Post year 3, yes, there is a possibility that the customer may migrate to Egypt or as you rightly said, could come to, let's say, [indiscernible] After the 5th year recession comes back all over again. And you will have to kind of defray the cost of advertising/marketing that you have to do get your customers online over a period of 2, 3 years, which is not that very -- it's something that we keep looking at, as to whether -- what is the money that you're required to spend for acquiring the customer to come to ICICI Lombard.

Customer, let's say landed on the website.

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] better price. Again, it's a function of the experience that you will expect. End of the day, let's say, you get an occupancy. It's like taking a -- it's like ICICI Lombard giving insurance for a new vehicle category for the very first time. In which case, I could possibly price it at basis, let's say, proxy models. I don't know what the claim experience of that new model could be, so I price it based on a proxy. Having said that, I will most [indiscernible] over money or 2 years. [indiscernible] is what I will do for additional customer, try and see what the experience is. And the experience is viable then why not. But our experience is, you can't be just a single channel company. You have to be a multichannel eventually. You have to create all the capabilities of [indiscernible] points are at different cases.

Good. And in the beginning of the year, we said we want to grow the CP business, but in the second half, there was some moderation. So we saw the mix going up.

And what we had said was for CBS, it will be around 35%. At the end of year, 22%, 23% which is in line with whatever is position...

[indiscernible] no competition because it went up to 25% and [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] we have changed in our approach, whether it was first half or second half. It's not a second half or [indiscernible] decided to gon slower on the commercial vehicle portfolio.

So that strategy is [indiscernible]

That's for [indiscernible] still impact, which is to say that we would want to see the CG continuing to be in that range of 35% and we don't want to go very, very aggressive in that segment because still, we believe that the price that you get [indiscernible] is not [indiscernible] Then, which is why we said that [indiscernible] around [ 35% ]. [indiscernible] More importantly, if you look at for the current year, which is '23, '24, we are not still seeing any kind of a price change on the [ '24, '25 ] so hence, we have to wait and see the effects on that. Last year, they changed the price increase from first week of June. So we'll wait and see how that will go. As of now, we are not seeing any indications of the price [indiscernible] which will also have a bearing on whether we want to go further [indiscernible].

The last one we had in 2022.

Very, very [ good ] [indiscernible]

And that [indiscernible] after [indiscernible]

That was after a gap of almost 3 years. First 2 years was 0, 1 year was with single-digit price industries.

So it [indiscernible] so the lunch boxes in use will see a Cost ratios in [ PP ] have actually moderated to 70%. Is that a new normal now?

So that's what we're really talking about. I think 2 things. One is we'll have to wait and see a couple of developments, whether I'll be getting a price change or not. If you don't get a price change, then defenitely I amn trying to have an impact given the level of inflation that we're making as a month of reserves. So that's one thing that we [indiscernible] The second is this whole chain that we have been talking about on the motors, [indiscernible] which is effective from 1st April '22. Again, you all have been hearing us even before the rules are [indiscernible] , right? We have been talking about to say that whenever the rules get notified, we will [indiscernible] the development for at least [indiscernible]. Around the ground, we would want to see the rules sitting taken by the ports . And for the very reason, if you see clearly there are already concreting business. [indiscernible]. I think the other [indiscernible] is not accepted [indiscernible] 6-month back. So obviously, it will get settled [indiscernible] the Supreme Court, within whatever time frame. So as of now, we have not taken any positive consulting from the change in rules that is effective from 1st April'22. But if you ask us for an overall basis, definitely been incremental ROE accretive proposition. Drag on investment leverage, but positive on the [indiscernible] So these are 2 developments that one we'll have to see. And finally, I would say on third party, in general, folks are more -- getting more and more [indiscernible] because end of the day, it's a pedestrian on the street, which is getting impacted by the accident. And therefore, if you look at core judgments, they are far more generous. Therefore, to that extent, it is kind of increasing the average claim size when it comes to [indiscernible] That's the other [indiscernible] When you are stocking in the context of those issues.

But [indiscernible] always...

Yes. But only because increasingly, they keep adding more elements. So they will say that, okay, in the past, they will be compensating for the person who has got impacted. Then they would say that other family members, who may equally be impacted because that was the sole earning member of the family, so on and so forth. Plus in the past, they may say that for mental agony and pain, we will pay twenty five thousand. Increasingly, they will say that number gets [indiscernible] . But you don't see the [indiscernible]third party price. So hence, to that extent, that will key factor when you look at party loss ratio numbers.

So we already have seen 1 year of this NVM input. So now no accident gets supported beyond after 6 months?

That's what I said. I think there are a couple of conflicting [indiscernible] We have been talking about a [indiscernible] quarter back. They have given a several [indiscernible]

The practice you are registering or...

So the cohorts have situations, because [indiscernible] insurance company, all third-party clinics [ appreciate at the course. ] So if it's, let's say, a cohort, which is, let's say, [indiscernible] , for example, which was [indiscernible] judgment saying that, the 6-month loans is not acceptable. We all [indiscernible] that particular restriction. You may still see, let's say, [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] states, which is the states which are not in line?

So [indiscernible] said that as of now, there are a couple of them. so it's a [indiscernible]. It's not something where we can say that in Gujarat, everything is okay. And let's say, [indiscernible] Everything is not okay, so it depends of the [ court ]. As each of the tribunals kind of decide as to whether they want to entertain the case or not because the moment the case goes for filing, the customer or it is the lawyer concerned, we'll refer to the judgment which says that the 6 month law is not [indiscernible] And then subsequently, the [ 4 judgments are [indiscernible] it's all course.

The proportion on the cases which you settle on the spot, let's say, compensation that changing because...

Again vary between cases. If there is an opportunity for us because, one, third-party accident as we keep saying, [indiscernible] Wherever there's a convincing reason for us to believe that this case is definitely a project case, [indiscernible] fighting [indiscernible] Whereas in a case where we may not be able to completely establish the happening of an accident because case happened 5 years back, 6 years back. And even a day which exists for us to be able to not completely depend in the [indiscernible] and there, we may look for some kind of the compromise [indiscernible] So each case, you have to look at on [indiscernible] basis. And then all [indiscernible] taken whether to go per [indiscernible] but even in majority of the cases, even if you have to go for [indiscernible] ,all we generally do is we get the settlement [ affected ] to the group. Because otherwise, it [indiscernible] , party, they come back and say that I was not [indiscernible] 2 parties. But we kind of make sure that, that also happens in [indiscernible] Then the possibility [indiscernible] to the extent [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] it's done at the country level, so what is the thumb rule that how this flow acceleration will reduce?

It's very difficult to kind of say cost on again, has got multiple asset symmetry.

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] Thats what I'm saying. So let's look at motor. Motor last 2 years for us has not been great, so we have been underperforming the market. As growth comes back, automatically will start contributing positively to the investment damage.

\ In the new [indiscernible] we get the backlog if we start [indiscernible] today...

But is not the only [indiscernible] . a multiple factors that are attached to it. Today, [indiscernible] combines [ INR 100 crores ]. [indiscernible] So there are multiple moving parts. I can't give you a number, which is why what we call, what we keep saying is as of now, it seems to suggest that a leverage of 4x is [indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] to be filed within 6 months and [indiscernible] the settlement...

Settlement can take its own growth. So what we have been saying in what we have said on an average, it should take roughly about 6 to 7 years. 2 to 3 years of intimation 20 duration model [indiscernible]. What is changing is this 2 to 3 months of [indiscernible] coming down the 6 months. The settlement period still largely remains the same.

Okay. But still 6 going to 4 and [indiscernible]

Which is what we have been saying. The reason why I said it's an overall in critical position, so on to say that is the drag on the investment campaign. What's a positive on [indiscernible]

So that [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] my overall [indiscernible] slightly positive [indiscernible] How much? I think, honestly, very difficult for us to say. We want to wait and see how it plays out. There are a lot of still moving parts in terms of the guideline.

But [indiscernible] we are seeing four times Leverage.

As [indiscernible] now, 4x leverage is maintainable because the other factors which you have to equally keep in mind is, if tomorrow, let's say, Motor continues to remain subdued and helped kind of substantially grows in numbers, we do have [indiscernible] because as you all know, does not have the same kind of ratio leverage is motor [indiscernible] but that's [indiscernible] will continue to remain what it is for us today. So [indiscernible] saying [indiscernible] moving parts, the way we kind of deliver on the [indiscernible] expectation, that's a factor. So hence, as of now, I think what we are saying is an investment of the 4x [indiscernible].

[indiscernible] which is a 41% today. so do we see that going back because like I said, our focus on growing on a [indiscernible].

So exactly. So our focus is on all the segments. also on the preferred segment [indiscernible] I think we obviously have taken conscious call for us to not necessarily [ write ] the same [ competitive bar ] is what other players in the market have been doing. So obviously, we have to [indiscernible] wait and watch. As I said, early signs seem to indicate that things are coming back. Once it comes back, they tend to kind of -- we are IT positioned to capitalize the opportunity. That's where we are positioned. For example, last 2 years, we have been undergoing the market. This year, the expectation is we should grow in line, and then for the next year onwards, obviously, we want to kind of exit market share. That's the focus.

And earlier in the motor [ TP ] loss ratio, there is to be this third-party [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] 2018.

Okay. Now it's all [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] so again, it's a question of how the portfolio development has happened over the years. And [indiscernible] was not a portfolio that we have been kind of underwriting. It's more the results of the industry-wide pool that has come [indiscernible] And the loss ratio estimates for something that was given by the U.K. government actually at the time of the pool was dismounted. [indiscernible] the number even the U.K. government actually [indiscernible] Yes. So just -- I don't know whether [indiscernible] this year or not. So the pool was in existence [indiscernible] In 2012, the industry had appointed maybe one of the member participants to act as we actually to determine the ultimate [ loss insurance ] [indiscernible] . So they came [indiscernible] a number, industry [indiscernible] 5-year period. When the pool got dismantle 2012 , I came out and said to determine what [indiscernible] loss ratio for the entire [indiscernible] would be. They said, we will engage the U.K. government actually in [indiscernible] what is the ultimate losses for the [indiscernible] . So they came out with a range, saying that this is the [indiscernible] losses, that the pool is expected to operate it. And each company again to the share of losses space is the [indiscernible] U.K. government actually [indiscernible] In reality, when we track the portfolio [indiscernible] realize it even that is insufficient [indiscernible] which is why the very first 2013, we earned what U.K. [indiscernible] Had proposed. We [indiscernible] an incremental charge of [ INR 100 crores, ] the very [ first year. ] Then we have been watching for the development over a period of time. I mean some of the years, we have to continue to strengthen the process. Which happened until 2018, post which [indiscernible] was the number of cases for us, which we are [indiscernible] [ the pool book ] was kind of [ reducing ]. And hence, over the last 5 years, we have not seen any need for any further strengthening of the [indiscernible].

So now for us in industry is based on our current underwriting.

For the market, I cannot say because markets will have to [indiscernible] certainly the reserving time disclosures of the pool hopefully those players put it out separately. We put out separate [indiscernible] So it's quite likely that some of those players may not be sufficiently [indiscernible] book, as we keep saying, is not just 1 or 2 years' loss development. Many times, it can actually run into 20, 25 years of age . But the good news is [indiscernible] has been mandatory for every player in the market [indiscernible] 31st March '22 to put on their website. The [indiscernible] factory disclosures across short tail lines of businesses and long tail bussiness.

Going back to growth when you see the same line growth this year and a [indiscernible largely, it should be motor, which would [indiscernible] lifting? But do we...

[indiscernible] line growth for...

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] But Motor, as I said, we have been losing market share in the last couple of years. Here, the expectation is given the fact that there are things that are getting reasonable and also the fact that it will be a transition from an expensive management standpoint. Hence, our sales I think we should be able to kind of grow in [indiscernible] And possibly the year thereafter try and see get an incremental market.

The overall mix, how should we look at it from a longer-term...

[indiscernible] outcome. [indiscernible] specifically targeting to say that I should be writing, let's say, held at [ 30% or quarter at 45%, makes it more a downturn. As we keep saying, both Motor held as well as commercial lines are equal segments of risk selection. But within these 3 broad categories, there are multiple subsegments as we all know. And the attempt is to make sure that we are able to pick up the [indiscernible]

Buyers, do you think will still grow as a proportion...

Buyers this year, as we have been explaining a couple of factors. One is the [ IAB ] reference rate, which was [indiscernible] mentioned they reach those contracts, then they reviewed us very keenly say should be done up a bit And that's why itself will obviously have an effect because that change is effective from 1st April '23. And hence, [indiscernible], there will be some pricing implications. But I would say as what we explained even in the earlier call, this -- the extent of drop in pricing may not be [indiscernible] because these are exposure-based portfolios where you cannot kind of price it unlike a normal typical retail portfolio segment. So hence, to that extent, while there's a price drop, but obviously, it is not as much as, let's say, what one would normally expect it to happen, so that's one impact of rate reduction on buyer. The second -- the positive development to it is the hardening of reinsurance rate that we have seen globally. Consequent to various kinds of events, clearly -- and this is a conversation that we keep doing at the beginning of every year into [indiscernible] reach of the programs is concerned. And there, clearly, we have seen consequently the number of [indiscernible] happening globally. The extent of price revision of the reinsurance rates have -- I mean not just for us, -- for the overall market, we have seen rates getting harding by bottle distance. So that's actually an element of improvement in [indiscernible].. How much of increase in pricing that we're able to translate back to the policyholders? Is something a function that each company will possibly take a decision now. Thanks to that extent, ] on balance, when we look at putting both of them together, our sense is on fire, possibly, you will see a price reduction early signs because April 1 happens to be the bulk of the corporate [indiscernible]. Typically, most of the companies are either ready on 1st April or they may follow calendar year as a basis of renewing their policies. So early sites of 1st April seems to be single digit price reduction is consequently affected ones, which is value expected lines. That's what we had thought.

And the reinsurance, when did this happen in over last year?

1 April '23. [indiscernible] 1 April'23 when the reinsurance programs had to be differentiated for renewals. [indiscernible] , we have seen, let's say, price [indiscernible] the range of 40%, 60% in the reinsurance of contracts of '23, '24, you will see [indiscernible] price change. But again, the impact would be variant for different players in the market. For example, for ICICI Lombard, in general, we have been exhibiting a profitable portfolio to the insurers. So hence, our commission terms that we would have bought from the [indiscernible] or the conditions attached to the renewal of the reinsurance program. Both of them would generally be kind of digitals. We haven't seen any kind of [indiscernible] impact. But for any other player who would possibly have exhibited an adverse outcome of the, let's say, the fire insurance, for example, they would have either had a reduced terms of commission income as a part of the reinsurance placements or they could have their regional program would come with various conditions, like, for example, a loss corridor, which we basically say that in this particular loss ratio threshold, we'll also still have to be borne by the primary insurance [ sub ]. So those conditions would be there as a part of their insurance contract, which we'll have to kind of looked at [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] that mean possible -- you mentioned something [indiscernible] have declined by 10%.

[indiscernible] rates are kind of -- so earlier, you remember about 3 years back, reinsurance when they had kind of said to the primary insurance companies like us, in case if you want to continue to await the insurance capacity, you have to charge for those risks at a minimum floor space which is why in those years in 2019 and 2020, fire insurance is a segment for the entire [indiscernible] growth of [indiscernible] and we [indiscernible] because there was some [indiscernible] pricing. [indiscernible] [ The moment there is no floor pricing. ] It is not [indiscernible] price. And therefore, that one would logically have expected a reduction impact, which is what I said, there is a reduction in pricing on the one side because of [indiscernible] with the lower pricing on [ IIP. ] But on the positive side, because there's a rate hardening, we are also being kind of [indiscernible] upon some part of the price increase on the cost of reinsurance that we have been incurring back to the policy.

What would be the net-net...

What I said, a single-digit reduction in price.

Put together [indiscernible]

Early signs, this is just the first one. We'll obviously have to wait and see how the [indiscernible]

So then [indiscernible] that would still be a flat book.

So we want to see as [indiscernible] context of growth, yes. But again, it's a function of the loss experience. [indiscernible] out. So in general, when you look at the overall [ commercial ex portfolio ], at least for ICICI Lombard, [indiscernible] look at it now just over [indiscernible] years, [indiscernible] of 3 to 5 years. Ingenia been very, very profitable.

[indiscernible] So in terms of the [ Hendry ], how do you see that lay out in terms of the market share?

[indiscernible] that we have to increase our market share from the current 2.9%. So our national market share is [ between 80% ] That's a journey that has been diverse, and that's why we have been kind of talking about making investments in distribution because we dominantly rated the indemnity. That's the category gets sold to agency distribution, so that's an area where we will invest. As we just talked about in 2021, '22, we talked about additional distribution. Even for the current year, I think we are continuing. So the early sign is, I think we have been able to kind of demonstrate growth in [ retail health. ] Primarily the business that we have been sourcing through agency growing faster than even [indiscernible] That early signs are giving us a lot of confidence. We want to stay [ invested ] and as I said, at the minimum, we able to drive the journey from 2.9% to natural market share that we have as a cost.

So how does the productivity compare with the [indiscernible]

We will obviously say that productivity for us looks definitely much better when you look at it. But different companies are of different measures of productivity. [indiscernible] may even say a single [indiscernible] on single policy, let's say, the distribution is [indiscernible] we may put a threshold to say that it's a combination of both, not only there's a number of policies that you source, but also get a reasonable ticket size in terms of value of premium as well, which is equally important to us. So there are different [indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] So that number could vary between different players in the market. From our standpoint, I think definitely, we believe whichever distribution that we are adding, those productivity levels are and slightly better than what we had expected, and it would be slightly higher than the numbers that you mentioned.

So this year, we [ grew ] we [indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] That for the industry was around [ 16% ].

[indiscernible] the industries are at 20% 21% roughly for the full year. Yes, for the full year [indiscernible] [ health ] companies grew slightly at [indiscernible]

So retail health is at 20%?

[indiscernible] I say market, it includes both [indiscernible] income base plus all the multi-line players.

So that's how we'll actually plug the...

That's how we expect to kind of increase the market share from the current 2.9%. So if you ask us over the last 6 months, we would have possibly gained about 0.1% to 0.2% market share.

But this time line for the [indiscernible] market share and [indiscernible]

Cost issues as we have been explaining, definitely, we want to see the retail sales position running in the range of [ 65% to 70% ]. That's the range that we are kind of comfortable [indiscernible] the book. In terms of time horizon, honestly, we have not put a time horizon. It's a long-term investment that we have to continue to make because it's not that we have [indiscernible] operations for the last 23 years. At least on retail and health, we have been kind of talking about [indiscernible] in the last 3, 4 years.

And this increasing market share will be January year [indiscernible] that are actually could be same [indiscernible].

So obviously, I don't want to kind of give you a number. I think as I said [indiscernible] instrument in market share from [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] market of [indiscernible] outcomes. Some market share gains will be...

We don't want to kind of only drive growth at the cost of [indiscernible] As we always keep saying, we would obviously want to kind of -- when you look at it from an absolute underwriting outcome currently, it will be a combined ratio negative because the cost of investments are currently getting expensed out, [indiscernible] but my cost of sourcing those businesses currently given the way it gets recognized, it's at almost about 35%, 40%, which is why we have been selling [ my combined issue is ] around [ 110 roughly thereabout. ] As the distribution start getting productive, as what we have seen early signs playing out, we would want to see the government ratio of that particular segment operating at between 98% to 100% in which case, they make some reasonable [indiscernible] .

Even at the [indiscernible] , you are saying it will be reasonable?

Yes reasonably It will be, let's say, early [ teens ] will be the return of the retail segment that -- so -- and that's what we would be kind of largely operating that. But however, there will be a continued new investment that we'll be taking on further additions to distribution. In which case, again, for the next year, given the fact that, again, we are continuing in this value, you'll still see the [indiscernible] . But the market share improvement will be [ specific ] When we talked about investments, at that point of time, market was not very sure about whether we will be able to increase market share [indiscernible] The good part is after 12 months, we have been able to see some early signs of improvement in market share. And obviously, you want to sustain that [indiscernible]

So I mean it's fair to assume the investments will continue at least for 4, 5 years, right, because the [indiscernible]

Because I think as a we keep saying, [indiscernible] [ inability ] [indiscernible] probably gets sourced to agents. The only thing is, if let's say, on the similar lines as corporate agency guidelines getting relaxed, viral banks have not been allowed to work with [ 9 ] [indiscernible] partners [indiscernible] 9 life companies. ] There has been discussions in the industry level as to whether the same could be done even from an agency. [indiscernible] agency utilization standpoint currently, [ agent ] is expected to be tied with only [indiscernible] . In case if those [indiscernible] happens, that will be a bit [indiscernible] But I mean say that, I think we'll have to wait and see how that developed.

So that's what the company was paying [indiscernible]

Yes, we already exist, but [ DSP ] comes with some kind of a limitation on what is the extent of some insured or let's say, what [indiscernible] of coverage that you [indiscernible] [ in policy spend. ] It's not completely free to source model. It does come with certain more recent [indiscernible] So that's one other aspect that we would also be willing to -- we are kind of working with the [indiscernible see whether the limits of policies, which can be sourced under the point of sale guidelines that can also request a revision upwards. But that's one. The other [indiscernible] is to completely open up the individual agency architecture in which case an agent can work not just with one insurance partner, it would work with multiple insurance partners. That oppose will require an act, which will take some time. But directionally, if that happens, I think, again, that's a great [ positive ].

[ Retail grew ] by 15% last year [indiscernible]

Yes. [indiscernible] but how was it [ 31% ]

Which is [ 31%? ]

That could be [ agency ]. The health agency. So retail health is 15 or 17. [indiscernible] so again, if you see quarter-on-quarter, just to give [indiscernible] into context. Q1 -- I think we started ramping up quarter-on-quarter. So if you see the first quarter, our growth [ was 8%, it ] was broadly lower than the industry [indiscernible] Second quarter, we were broadly at par in the industry. So the industry was 16%, we were also 16%. Third is we had third quarter and fourth quarter is where we started growing significantly higher than the industry. So industry was [indiscernible] we were [ 24% ]. In fact, if you look at Q3 and Q4 put together out of those 6 months, a whole month is something -- 5 months in fact, [indiscernible] 4 months we have grown higher than the industry. [indiscernible] that sense. So this momentum is something that we have to carry through as far as the coming [indiscernible] is also [indiscernible] So as far as our [ metric ] is concerned, is to grow on the new business. You see we can go faster than [indiscernible] industry [indiscernible]

And do we -- are we getting the benefit of this access...

The distribution access?

[indiscernible]

Both. So again, that was one of the forcible apprehensions in the market had [indiscernible] whether the distribution will continue, but -- so both is not that the [indiscernible] were quite old. So both access were just about 3 years old, 3 years old project. [ Taxes was ] 2 years for what the [indiscernible] to the distribution. So hence, it was not that [indiscernible]. And that's the reason [indiscernible] market share penetration that they were able to do in both of these [ back ] partners. They are actually operating at a low single-digit [ representation ] And when we announced the day the market is [indiscernible] [ Openly ] is it a continuing one, but if you look at the extent of market share penetration that we have been able to do today, we have a wallet share [indiscernible] double-digit [ number ]. So both the distributions [ depend way in ] terms of what we were looking for.

So this year, what would be a percentage between [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] as I said, insofar as the overall wallet penetration is concerned, but both [indiscernible] the number will be double-digit [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] is something that we continue to be positive.

Positive across the commercial lines, which is -- when you're saying corporate [indiscernible] looking quite good for us on multiple [ back ]. It's kind of delivering growth in price. We continue -- even for the current year, as we speak, we have been able to get a reasonable price increase, so it's a growth driven by price change. It's a growth driven by accretion in market share. Why we say accretion market share? Again, I'm sure you would have read about the [ CSG ] audit that happened on the [ state-owned companies, ] where they kind of realize that possibly, they have lost money to the tune of almost [indiscernible] crores. [indiscernible] significant adverse underwriting outflows. So today, each of those state-owned companies have given, let's say, instructions to the respective operating offices to look at underwriting particularly the [ condition of corporate ], which is a great [ positive ]. So we are continuing to operate market share on the set of accounts that [indiscernible] comfortable underwriting. The last year, there's also policy. The last 2 years, because of COVID, people did not [indiscernible] over hiring [indiscernible] . That is some kind of early indications of higher [indiscernible] So whatever growth numbers that you're seeing on corporate health for us is a combination of [indiscernible]

When we met for the [ IP ], I think we had a similar question [indiscernible] And I don't be [indiscernible] provided by Lombard Group it's a low ROE [ problem ]. So how is that now [ fitting ] into the [indiscernible]

So in general, overall health is what I said, not just corporate health. In general, the health segment will exhibit a early [indiscernible] . But having said that, it's 2 large segment for one to be [indiscernible] definitely presented in so far as that [indiscernible]. So hence, which is why we haven't continued to make investments on both retail. And on the corporate side, again, when you look at the corporate, they will never place only their [ inflation ] requirement and [ insurance partner. ] We would also look at placing the other [indiscernible] , whether it is a property, [ more liability, ] et cetera, et cetera. And when you look at, let's say, the profitability of each of those accounts, we would obviously want to price each of those [indiscernible] on a stand-alone basis, so that they become viable . But having said that, in some accounts, we will look at account level outcomes based on individual [indiscernible] . There, we clearly see that when we look at the overall experience of writing their property risk [indiscernible] [ this liability is ] and that interest, the account is [indiscernible] underwriting standpoint, so that was in [ a comfortable writing ] [indiscernible] But if you ask us, given the current state at which the [ intention ] is operating at, the segment will generate you early [indiscernible] . But over the [indiscernible] , it all depends on how effectively are you able to run that segment well. For example, in the current context, we have been largely in [ hospitalization ] The product [indiscernible] largely [indiscernible] Whereas when you look at health care spends, I mean there are current numbers have got around, but there is a very large proportion of the [indiscernible] That's starting to get covered through insurance in a reasonable [ term ] as we speak. And which is where we have been a significant [ investing ] on the use of [indiscernible] in doing that is predominantly on the similar lines is what we have been doing on the rest of the commercial ex portfolio for the last 9 years, which is basically look at various risk management efforts, which the entities [indiscernible], which would actually kind of translate into better [indiscernible] experience [indiscernible]. And here again, from an OPD standpoint, our [indiscernible] based insurances, the entire [indiscernible] can we play a very meaningful part in an individual's preventive/[ windless ] based offerings, which, hopefully, in the long run, will possibly even minimize the number of hospitalizations. That's one of hypothesis. We are not making anything on the number that is [indiscernible] In which case, the [ ROE ] profile would have [ to go a change ]. If the more you're able to work well on the derivatives [indiscernible] you actually see, let's say, reduced number of customizations. And therefore, you can translate into a better pricing [indiscernible] different market share.

For this group, only preventive [indiscernible]

On a stand-alone OPD, I think you will obviously start seeing about those things coming through because, again, [indiscernible] build experiences on the product spend or [ get developed. ] So by example, on [ water ], today among the products that are available, which is based on payer premium based on the [ vision that you drive ], pay a premium based on how we are driving [indiscernible] . So those are all currently and add-ons that are available to an existing policy. But as the experiences start feeding [indiscernible] from each of those individual add-ons, we will start getting some of those plans on a stand-alone basis.

Compared to [indiscernible], you have the advantage because of the [indiscernible] on the expense, would that [indiscernible]

They have also been given a slightly better [ limit on expedite ] , [indiscernible] So therefore, with extent [indiscernible] will have to kind of work on those -- but having said that, as we say, they are single product companies. That is [indiscernible] multiproduct company, and therefore, the actual [indiscernible] [ defray ] the cost over different lines of business. Secondly, as we keep saying, at least half of the insurance market is corporate [indiscernible] . And as I said, no corporate generally plays only the [indiscernible] [ requirement of the insurance part of ] it. So therefore, that benefit of the other set of risks that [indiscernible] is [ exposure. ] It's something that we get faced with companies [indiscernible]. And that's where you also get to see a lot of volume setting expected. So employees of corporates [indiscernible] feed in to the volumes of negotiations with the [indiscernible] providers, and that will just [indiscernible] better negotiated rates with the [indiscernible]

Now our numbers have been [indiscernible] in the full year. We could still -- with realize the [indiscernible].

[ Obviously, this again held ] as we keep saying, [ especially ] from a regulation standpoint, on the [ lighter ] side, it's a one-sided [indiscernible] Once you onboard a customer, there is a guaranteed lifetime when you will [indiscernible] As the reducing currency stands, I cannot certainly say that [ 3G ] is exhibiting a significant adverse loss [indiscernible] and therefore, be lower premiums of [ pretty at the point ] of [indiscernible] , let's say, products. I have to do it [indiscernible] could be different based on [indiscernible] , but I can't price in individual customer level. And hence, third, as -- because this portfolio is relatively longer term, is the duration of the policy that you issue would be, let's say, 1 year or 3 and up to 3 years. [indiscernible] , the risks that we are [indiscernible] is significantly [indiscernible] And hence, you should wait for the [ law development of ] the [ book ]. And then possibly see whether the book is executing a portfolio [indiscernible] the [ ROA ] range that you're talking [indiscernible] Unless you are able to end up reprice the portfolio consistently over longer periods and then possibly exhibit in our way, which is in that range of [indiscernible] We have to wait for those developments [indiscernible] The moment you significantly outprice yourself in the market. I mean knowing the customers, obviously, they're going to kind of look for an alternate [indiscernible] insurance, in which case, there's an [ opportunity ] They may not possibly see the similar levels of growth as what we are possibly expecting. To health, we have to again look at the long-term development of the book. People want to really say whether it's -- whatever our [indiscernible] As of now, at least [indiscernible] is generally kind of run with a loss ratio, which will be ranging between [ 6% to 7% ] and then it could [indiscernible] delivering health consistently [ sub 95 ] [indiscernible] Loss ratio, which will be ranging between 65% to 70%. And then it could possibly be delivered early -- early teens is the way we look at. Delivering health consistently, sub-95, I think we got to wait and see around that.

What is the maximum price increase in the revenue, which is allowed on which you may have taken?

Under the current guidelines, earlier, you have to kind of go for the regulatory approvals for price change. Now we're completely [ use and file ]. You decide as an insurance company basis, your internal grow [indiscernible]to.

Sir, what is it that you would -- what would you guys [indiscernible]?

If for a given cohort, you find the pairing division is to be executed in the range of [ 50% ] plus, for example. Having said that, you will obviously want to kind of see whether a 50% price increase will be to get bulk of a customers back or not. You are going to say a balance down to 50%. If it is you have to do something lower. And then over a period of time trying to catch up on deloss experiences. So we will never -- obviously, we have to be equally mindful of, let's say, the impact has...

I meant impact as how much has been the [indiscernible]

That's what I said, it will vary between commerce to commerce.

You -- any specific individual [indiscernible] what is the maximum it would be sorted.

It can go up to upwards in 50% plus as well.

Impacted it does have.

Impacted it can go upto -- upwards in 50% plus. But having said that, because it's the price increase that you're [indiscernible] exhibited or the basically the change. You may not have done a price increase for lets say 3 years back or 6 years back, in which case that [ 50% ] price increase looks quite high. But you have to see at what point of was that cohort repriced the earlier. It could [indiscernible]couple of years back. So hence, those are dynamics that kind of play out when you look at the [indiscernible].

But this has taken around 25%.

So we did -- of the renewable book. We did a price increase over 19%. The last price division, which we took was towards quarter 3 of 2021. at which point of time, we are a roughly weighted average pricing was [indiscernible].

And there is slammed based price...

Either based on age or also you kind of do it based on geography. So those are the [indiscernible] called the different [indiscernible]. But increasingly, as I mean in terms of which type of customers that we want to kind of reselect, again, we're looking at proxy models. To see whether there are other factors that we can equally look at in terms of fund ratings.

Last question on the expenses. So we have seen pretty much much the worsening of the [indiscernible] value should complete slaying by...

The value because of the various investment that we have to do.

Right. So these investments that I was just looking at long living deeper, I've seen its promotion is now sales in agriculture is [ INR 15,000 crores ]. So that number, which is a very new school. I think [ INR 1,000 just gone to 3,000 ] over the last 5 years. So -- is that...

Again, it cannot be [indiscernible]. Of course 5 years that you got [indiscernible] on a stand alone basis. So therefore the number inherently will be kind of adjusted for..

And then I look at [ 4 ] -- as a percentage of [ GWP ] , right ?

Yes. So which is the -- you should look at the percentage of [indiscernible].

5% has gone to 9%.

Yes.

That's the sales promotion.

Yes, those are individual line items, I think, will be very difficult for us to kind of comment to.

At the strategy level is that something you...

Which is what I said, at an aggregate level, when we look at the company as [indiscernible]. You look at our combined issues and which is as I said roughly around 100 and 260, while our loss ratios will be in the range of [ 70% to 75% ] and the experts will be the balance for about [ 38% to 39% ]. So that there [indiscernible]. Directionally, when we say and what we have also talked about, I mean, we had organized also digital day for [indiscernible] for the other market participants. In which one of the things that was asked was what is the extent of investments that we are in on various technology-related initiatives that could span across sourcing, game servicing and even internal personal efficiency. And there we had said on an average -- investments that we do on various technology initiatives has an impact on the combined ranging between 1.5% to 2%. So there is an element of the investments that we do on building technology adjustment. And third is, let's say, the investment that we are doing or building various systems. A combination of all this is where my expense ratio number, which are currently at about [ 38 to 39% ]. When we are talking about the combined ratio coming down to [ 102 ] over the next couple of years. Again, it will be a function of an increment in the overall efficiencies of the investments that we have done. And therefore, on a higher top line, the relatively max [indiscernible] should slightly get [indiscernible]. So that's one thing that you will see directionally from an expense ratio standpoint. And two, obviously, we want to write [indiscernible].

Additional net loss is at [ 74 to 75 ]

Yes.

I would have actually built in [indiscernible]

I think [indiscernible] on the other way around.

The [indiscernible] is 70% loss.

When I said from motor, they're actually going off the segments, which are slightly higher than that for less -- lower cost of distribution. That makes a lot of sense for us. Not to say that we are not writing the new segments. But incrementally, we'll prefer to go after a segment which are high on [ LR ] , but low on cost of acquisition. So hence, which is why I said, relatively the loss ratios could undergo an increase. So that's one factor that you have to keep in mind. The second reason why I said the loss ratios will also retain to kind of grow upwards. And again, we have function of how the third-party price increase plays you. Again, the third-party price increase doesn't play out then optically, you will hit find an increase in the loss ratio numbers. But relatively, I'll say -- obviously want to keep the overall cost of distribution [indiscernible] which is why I said it's a combination of both, where directionally the [ 104 to 102 ] will be a function of both. On the expense side, it will be a function of the incremental top line that we needed. And hence, the expense ratio will start to get better. And two, our gross ratio should slightly be in that range of [ 70% ]

Also, this building in those incremental costs for health et cetera?

All that is [indiscernible]. Yes, absolutely. So when we are giving a number of [ 102 ] over the next couple of years.

So we will see it continue to be intact? I mean the investments patency -- you would see the [indiscernible]

That is clear the expectation. And two, for us, investment is an ongoing one. Any investment that we have to do is an ongoing one across those [indiscernible]

Is the [indiscernible] open?

Yes. So now that at [indiscernible] is behind. So which line would be any...

Sir, any area where these equally [indiscernible] makes a lot of sense.

Okay. But to look at a relatively smaller player, honestly, does not bring much into the table. And to that extent, rightfully so, we will not be looking at anyway. So if at all there's an opportunity, you will look at companies, which kind of, its same within the areas of the question that you've asked -- are talking about. Anything that involves a franchise. If you look at [indiscernible] significantly existing, we've been investing on to build the retailers franchise. So any of those portfolios makes a lot of sense or not to say that some of these companies are available, all to look at companies which are relatively large in size. That makes a lot of sense. But it's not that any one of them is available, so we are quite open. But nothing in specific that we're looking at, at this point of time.

Between brand and pricing, which segments will have much more brand savings as company brand.

Generally, motor and health, both of them find a lot of semblance when it comes to brand. As far as commercial lines are concerned, brand does play a very important role, but a large element of it goes into -- so far as pricing discounts. Because in general, corporates tend to kind of look at pricing as one of the key factors in the decision making. But having said, which is where we wanted to change the anti narrative away from price into more what we call as value-added services, which is to see ourselves as playing a very important role in the corporate journey of reducing this. But we play -- so we kind of actively invest in multiple areas on fire and marine and various other segments to bring down their losses. And in the process, pricing at levels which are far more the reason. And there you have seen, therefore, the attachment points for renewal is much, much higher. So -- but -- generally [indiscernible] tend to have far more similar adjustment to impact. But at the time of initial purchase for motor, for example, customers will not even be kind of looking at which insurance document they don't have. All that they're concerned is of only insurance policy at the point of dealership. But once the customer has experienced a claim service is when the brand plays a very, very important role. And then their stickiness of the customer and the brand gets to be slightly [indiscernible], which is why we say even on the health side, someone was experienced a claim by retention rates with respect to that category of customers will be upward to 3 different [indiscernible]. But in the very first year, the one has not experienced a claim, then they will tend to look at more price, there they will look at shifting to a partner in the year of [indiscernible] or in the year of renewal. But both of them play very, very important role, since you wanted specifics, kind of [indiscernible].

So [indiscernible] only a bit that 18% to 20% now or how [indiscernible]?

So it is a function of how different lines will kind of delay. So as I said is health continues to be one of the fastest growing segment. Definitely, they tend to have impact on earnings. You will not be able to see that 30% plus [indiscernible]. As we can see ROE in that range say 18% to 20%. So we'll have to see how the mix of the portfolio plays out. As of now, given the fact that we are looking at all of them positively, whether it's motor, health or commercial line. Which is why we have been saying next 2 years, the ROE should be in the range of 18% to 20%. And from there on, if you're able to get the combined further lower, then obviously, we'll be able to improve the other. This is, of course, depending on which segment grows and what we [indiscernible]

As for ICICI stake increase -- I mean in call they said, I mean we can...

They said all their options were right.

So hence earlier, they were saying, I mean only if the deadline has been extended. So now in terms of precedence, we can --

That's an option that's open. So as of now, we have not heard any specific conversation on.

But if that's the option, they must take any approval again or membership.

Either it is less than [indiscernible] experience, it's, if you look at over cycles, we have seen more number of players [indiscernible] under to the industry. For example, when the industry was freed from tariff. Freed from pricing restriction, alot many players got added in 2008. In the last 5 years, there has not been any kind of meaningful entrants to this [indiscernible], but 5 years before, there were 4 or 5 players who entered. So between 2008 to 2018, almost every 2 years, one or 2 players were added. If you look at the current thought versus the [ new Chairman ] here as I mentioned, is looking at significantly increases the pressure and their thought processes when they want to -- implementation. They want to give different insight of licenses to the market. When I say different type of licenses, you can look at banking, there is a small variance. There's an co-operative bank. There is a commercial bank and so on and so forth. Similarly in insurance, they want to add more licenses. We'll have to see what type of players come. If there are players who come and looks at writing a specific geography, a niche product line, it doesn't do any harm to us.But if someone comes with a multiproduct -- multi-distribution license, There, we'll have to see what pockets they are they come. In they come with a completely deep capital borrowing model, we can't do anything. Honestly, on the private side, we don't send...

Nothing in the West Sir.

West, We are far more -- rationally. So hence, we don't see -- point of this entering Indian market, we don't see so much of the chance.

So what has happened to [ broking ] has not yet happened in general [indiscernible]. Even in America.

It already happened in multiple forms for different lines. we haven't seen anyone willing to continue [ G3-burncapital ]. What an excellent year. [Indiscernible]

So obviously, one credible thing which is happening is our market share side. Right? So moving on the OD side or even -- so on and so forth. So obviously, the April numbers are also a bit lower than -- that's previously as -- considering you'll have our [ NDC ] access and so on and so forth that we talk about as well focus on retail [indiscernible] or market share and just getting the entire footprint in terms of the market. So we make it participate...

so if you look at the segments of the market, One is motor. The second is health. Third is commercial lines and fourth is [indiscernible]. So these are our 4 product segments that we look at. And if you look at the last year, I think the challenge primarily has been on motor. Because if you remove motor from the picture, I think each of these segments are doing reasonably well. So even if you look at last year, we grew higher than the industry. Industry was [ 16%, ] we are at [ 17%. ] Now if you look at motor targets year what we have been talking consistently, the reason of growing slightly lower or significantly lower than the industry is more of a output -- is relevant decision. It's nothing to do with lack of distribution capabilities. Motor since COVID has impacted the industry. Has gone through its own set of challenges, first starting from the demand side, then obviously heightened the competitive intensity. And since then, we have taken a call to be more conservative as far as the mutual result -- intensity -- hydrant intensity has been seen grow on the private [indiscernible] side. Our testimony to this has been the hydrant combined ratio. So if you followed our [indiscernible] last year. The first half was around [ 124%, 125% ] [indiscernible] for motor. The third quarter came down to 118%. So to some extent, there has been an improvement, but this combined ratio -- something which has been significantly higher than what we would have seen in the past. So having seen what's happening, what we did was -- we calibrated our strategy. And we said that we would rebalance our portfolio more towards commercial vehicle and two-wheeler side and private car. So historically, private car used to be 55% of our portfolio. [indiscernible] used to 2-wheeler and 17% was the mix of CV business. And since then, because of the steps that I did mention about, now private car is lesser than 50% of the portfolio. We had mentioned that CV will be around the 20s, and we ended the last fiscal at 23%. Now as we see how the year is expected to unfold. One thing is that atleast from the demand side, from a demand perspective, at least the private car and the CV business seem to be doing reasonably well. And that growth should continue as far as the running year is concerned. The challenge would be on 2-wheeler. The 2-wheeler business has not seen the recovery post-COVID as was anticipated, and we'll have to give it a few more quarters to see how that kind of shapes. Within this, objectively speaking, if the improvement on the underlying portfolio comes through, which there are early signs, as I mentioned about the third quarter combined ratio for the industry and even for that part that you see the competitive intensity between each of the -- if you look at how the growth or how competitive intensity has been standing out. We have seen some moderation as far as this -- a lot of competitors are concerned. Because people have kind of recalibrated their position because -- the point is that do you see any competitor which has a deep capital one model? And the answer to that, it seems to be no. So people have taken certain positions and as the impact starts to hit them on the profitability aspect, you see some calibration. The next aspect is that even this year, we -- the motor third-party price increase is not yet announced. And one needs to see whether that would come through or not because inflation is real. So obviously, whatever losses shows that the industry is looking at last year with automatically grow -- will increase because...

[indiscernible]

So that was expected in the month of April. It came through in the month of June. It was a single digit pricing atleast. If you see history, people expect double-digit price increase because the inflation -- so the inflation that we carry is double digit and one would expect at least a price -- a double-digit price increase to offset that inflationary impact.

[indiscernible] change. Consequently, the new third party, the motor vehicle -- it was...

We are seeing still [indiscernible] judgements, right -- as of now, we are not [indiscernible] there should be -- is there any number. But, obviously, it is incrementally ROE positive. It can be a [insicernible] but unfortunately, we are seeing, let's say, both high courts giving some [indiscernible] whether there's a law of 6 months should be applied or not and now the court has given a favourable good month. And some or the other courts should not necessarily said that we will go by 6 months now. So hence, of course in some form or the other, maybe the Supreme Court or so. That point of time, obviously, we're going to wait and watch.

Because you wanted to change to that in Q4 last year when we thought about...

what we had said was we will wait for roughly for 12 to 18 months for it to get implemented exactly to your point. But in the fact that there are these changes which are still not necessary accessive. It will be too premature for us to kind of making a revision in the loss reserves. And then subsequently, if it gets kind of -- our sense is it may -- that the probability of the 6 months getting done away with, we don't think that's going to happen. So that's going to kind of largely be is. The question is whether will they say it, it can be accepted up to a particular period. We will have to wait and see for that.

But you will review it at the end of this year or...

We have been watching the development on this space, and we will take a view. So as of now, we are not paying.

It seems that it's kind of conflicting and you maybe have to wait at till the end.

We don't hide till the end. So which is why we are not seeking any change at this point of time.

But if you are to kind of reserve the bank in [indiscernible].

Again, our [indiscernible] may not necessarily apply it to the past is what our sense is. Though [indiscernible] has gone further on back end. And they have said it will be effective for -- all those life policies and the accidents have to be integrated within 6 months now April '22. Which the time frame is already over. So hence, logically, we should get much more favorable outcome or result of that, but we'll wait for... But just let's say it's clear now that incrementally, we will have to [indiscernible]

Yes. And then how much can be the outcome data in terms of...

That we will wait and see. We will wait and see in terms of how that end [indiscernible] honestly, it puts us into a favorable position because the extent of inflation as what [indiscernible] for us [indiscernible]. For the market, while we don't publicly have that number, but I would say it's a single digit. So that's a single digit [indiscernible] what we are saying. So therefore, it puts us into an advantage [indiscernible][ 80% to 85% ]. So that whether the reverse, we use it for an opportunity to grow. It's something that we will kind of look at. On the one side, we will not only just keep it in the P&L. We want to obviously use that money for further investments.

And so you will move that to solvency as a one time?

[indiscernible] always is one time. Just assuming for a moment. This becomes an off, right? So what will happen? I mean no other carry [indiscernible] just like it has slightly lower. Let's say, 8% of whatever it is, if he says I will get a 4% in the write-back of reserves, which will be an improvement in losses for me. Now what do we do with that number? What do we do that number? I mean either use it for growth or I mean just keep it as retained earnings. I know [indiscernible]. Automatically deployed backward growth.

We see each is a bit [indiscernible]

[indiscernible].

So basically, when you support you mean releasing of that each year and get into segments...

For example, even if you remember, during COVID time, also we know -- you for the fact that the loss [indiscernible] were very low. But we didn't kind of exactly bring down the loss issues exactly to those [indiscernibles]. We said we -- gradually over a period of time because as and when the tide turns over, you will not have the ability to suddenly increase those loss issues. Same outpaces what we have here.

So the NBA benefit is just on the inflation.

Primary is inflation.

Because on the ongoing basis.

2 impacts, one is inflation. The second is you will also see an improvement in product frequency.

Investment cost was down,

Investment cost goes down, but product frequency is real. The ability of us -- I mean, the first point is both, if leverage goes down, underwriting improves. But on an overall basis, [indiscernible] The second is, which is in broad proportion, that's a permanent bill, because the ability of us to investigate an accident, which has happened 5 years back, I mean we all know the brown reality. That can be massive. I mean we will have to see again how the incidents we are able to prove, how many incidents we are not able to...

I think your guidance on [indiscernible]

When this comes to this know -- said, since you have been hearing us pretty much on all the calls, what we said was even this 102 is with the current level of price inflation motor. If things improve on the ground is what we are seeing as early signs, maybe the [ 100 and 220 ] will accelerate as [indiscernible] for the --

That's not going to come through. They're talking about now --

Atleast, ost of the players seems to be quite sensible now regarding to couple of years versus left out. You look at that, I mean, since you guys start again. You can buy a monthly numbers of cordination. We really see budget out overall, even retail motor. On a quarter-on-quarter, the growth rates amounted is, which is exactly to remember what we are proud about at the time when they started operations. We said they will get up to a scale and obviously, for various reasons, they will start getting more.

Do you think that because of countersharing or that's because -- how they have become prudent?

So it's a combination. I would say is they've also become prudent because they have courteous claim, which they think is viable from their standpoint. And the fact that there was a bit of over coming to the markets and multiple [indiscernible]. So to that extent, they also start to get far more reasonable. So maybe just 2 more players were still left out in going very aggressive. And I'll say even they -- the public information there. You're seeing sort of growth in terms of growth rates. So -- and our sense, they will also not be able to sustain for a long bit of time.

But then when you look at market share because...

Some of those trends. The profitability of the segment has [indiscernible] now -- so market share products came up for the last couple of years since the market is starting to become reasonable as what [ Ankur ] mentioned. Our thought process this year is to grow in [indiscernible]. That was on motor.

[indiscernible] Motor products ?

On motor specific. In motor in the aggregate, we will want to see also growing in line with the market for this year. Given that last 2 years, we have had a decrease in market share as what [indiscernible]. That's expertise.

That is any new channel addition or generally the same...

So in general same channel is pretty much even the same or, if you look at the type of businesses that we are largely going after to recollect for the last 2 years, we have been talking about growing auto segments, which are relatively older vehicles, which are high on LR but lower cost segments. Those are segments that we're going after. And for which we are anyway which we spent also trying to create a much more balanced mix between OEM contribution agency and [indiscernible] digital opportunity advances.

[indiscernible]

So therefore, yes, maybe just come to your point.

Yes. So the point was what [indiscernible] when I look at the combined ratio of that changed, right? So now you are seeing across the more expense line coming down, cost ratio going up and the combined ratio kind of holding out that it has to -- so what it actually means that when you look at TPA, where people are doing in now. Advertisement was one line which people aren't reducing. But can some commission be built under a loss ratio mechanical, where you are seeing that a dealer or the services that you're providing or kind of doing back. I pay you, but that will now come through a loss ratio mechanism for in taking a sort of cut and so on and so forth. So the loss ratio goes up. Expense comes down, combined ratio static, people are compliant on [ OEM ] but basically just the same thing...

Want to be [indiscernible] they can choose to be [indiscernible]. This can happen. My sense is very unlike given what the market is kind of wanting to largely

Are the levers around this...

I put this [indiscernible] and the second thing is this will be who proved provided people are willing to spend something incremental, forget about whether it is loss or loss ratio or whether it is [indiscernible] expense. Question is are -- does -- do companies have more amount to spend or not? More amount if spent, which means 2 providers and combines are operating in the range of [ 95 to 100 ]. But people are already kind of significantly building. So therefore, the ability of them continue to add something more to the -- which will mean -- forget about the means. Through which -- the cost of acquisition is getting incurred. They don't have to meet spend that [indiscernible].

The first step is obviously becoming compliant. Does it mean [indiscernible] , which you can [indiscernible].

Let's for one moment go with your own theory. Even if someone wants to pay [indiscernible], we do situation or it's related to [indiscernible] management is as well as what it is to this [indiscernible] because part of that...

So what I'm saying is, let's say, you are combined of 102. And let's say, it's [ 70 32 ]right now. So that's 32 comes from 30. Expense goes up from 70 to 72 there. So it's kind of static but you're compliant. And then you continue doing...

Today, we're talking the growth rates would actually slow down for sometime because you're not even compliant. And we are saying that... so the market shift can happen because people who are compliant will [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] saying example of yours, in that there was operating in 110 combined. That's an example. So they continue to operate 110.

But they will become compliant and they can continue to -- of growth rates.

So are those companies somebody willing to continue to operate or not.

So that's a fair thing. Point is that -- what I was trying to -- my sense is even -- just to answer your point, I don't think the market is right now willing to kind of travel that part. The sense that we get on the ground is there seems to be a lot of discipline that has been [indiscernible] in the -- and even the focus which the regulator has today on the ways of [indiscernible] which are doing business, they also seem to be in the focus. We are saying that profitably to see the regulation is they want to keep the overall cost of doing business to be lower. And as a console business combinations. And you see there the narrative also is the regulators wanting to move away from micro management of more individual regulations into more macro level separations. And they have clearly indicated some of the measures to be combined policy agreements, solvency ratios and so on and so forth. Given the thirst and the regulatory is also wanting to look at these aspects, the ability of a player to consistently continue to bleed. We don't take is sustainable from a long term.

What about this competition of 20 licenses, et cetera, like --

Let me come. The question is what type of companies competing? That's what we have been explaining, right? Narrative is the same as banking is. There are different types of bank given different type of place. The same narrative is what [indiscernible] regulator wants to do on the insurance side. So it's going to be in each geography, in each segment, in each product line scalable price over stability. Question is are there anyone coming as a multiproduct, multichannel in India kind of base opportunity? Let's say, as someone which an important partner wanting to set up base in India. Knowing generally, I won't say that the business would be combined or lets say 15 to 20 years on the line. That doesn't make sense. So far, we have also not seen anyone which have completely dead capital model, into continue to bleed or an unduly defined period of time. So for some period...

So on the motor side now...

Seems we're getting sensible is what I would say. But as I said, still couple of players who are still kind of writing it very aggressively or sense is even that to kind of get better. Actually, the credit line seems to be good. No one-off just a quick one on this queue?

[indiscernible] is we saw a solution opportunity on one of the transaction which kind of gets reduced from our top line. And thereby, however, commercially viable interact. [indiscernible] To do a coinsurance, then it kind of gets us to be adopted -- just like [indiscernible] in line with [indiscernible] so different companies would we have different arrangements. All of them sit largely on the lines of what transition the model has been line because it's a [indiscernible] which gets reduced from my top line. And therefore, to that action and since it was done in quarter pool, which is why we separately called that out to say that it is more on of transaction that we did.Okay. So that's something that we evaluate. There's something to say that because at that point of time, or it was more of a one rounding, depending on whether these are commercial viability to it then why not? [indiscernible] happen to evaluate. The other part is around the insurance side are one [indiscernible], that's obviously [indiscernible], sedan some used [indiscernible] or something. Still I don't have reported [indiscernible]. So basically, they have been created -- but the general insurance players are or taking a little bit of an impact that cycles out great.

So I want to probably put things into context, unlikely with the Indian market, a global market, the retrans market is not dependent on investment. It's basically based on very low [indiscernible]. So basically, the [indiscernible] last 4, 5 years, consistently, the global insurance industry, [indiscernible] is extremely capital intensive because for you to have those ratings of [indiscernible] we need to have a lot of redundant capital. That is how the funding agencies require that and what they have been getting as the return has been single-digit. Market has been operating at 7% to 8% which is even lower than the cost of the [indiscernible]. Now what has resulted into this? What you spoke about is [indiscernible] for them. So [indiscernible] is the biggest driver of that age cost. And last 5 to 7 years, if you look at last 10 years average, the last 5 years have been much more than the last 10 years average on the [indiscernible]. Multiple events have contributed to that. And then there was this COVID, then there was some [indiscernible]. So to [indiscernible] this has been the state of the share. Earlier also, you had some hedge funds and some of the U.S. basins are alternate capital, because again, excess of [indiscernible] which was again the [indiscernible]. So since then, I think, 1st of January, is a period that most of the global markets renew direct companies or the markets and new. And that is where you saw a bulk or the significant increase in the property cat rates across the globe, not limited to any one country, but it was a very broad-based rate increases. You had U.S., you have Europe, now Australia, Japan are expected to follow soon. That extent, India was not an exception. In fact, we were -- because [indiscernible] had gone through, we knew that we could expect this kind of a price increase as far as the market is concerned. So yes, that has gone to, now the range is 4% to 16%, depending upon how the table companies at a [indiscernible]. Yes, that is on the [indiscernible]. So it's not an every [indiscernible] card programs, mostly operative. So the bulk of the increase is what we have seen on the property line businesses. And important element which has happened is that since the [indiscernible]. Eventually, we are having a bad number yes, yes. The second important [indiscernible] are concerned is that 2018. [indiscernible] that happened. It was also property business, saw significant softening of prices that continue to 2017 and then eventually for us. And at that point of time, besides it's kind of paint the picture, which was basically industry burn cost. And because the insurance cities were suffering losses that it was partial stipulation that if you want to use certain capacity, then I become [indiscernible]. And the reason you would recall, there was significant increase in the fire premium that we see. And on this year, last year, [ FY '23 ] towards the -- and I came up with the regulations stating that yes, the insurance part track should not have an IB speculation. And that was something which was effective 1st of April. So this renewal, that investment, there was this apprehension that how to set that they will play out. So now because there's a regulatory retirees, obviously have not put us position into the contract, but it has changed. So they have started asking each of the companies like what is going to be your pricing method? So for example, if there is no key question. As an insurance something supposed to the comfort [indiscernible] go look at segments, various exposures and how [indiscernible] companies are asked in different companies have presented their pricing in up to the insurance, which has directed improved. These additional commercials being in the -- we know that add something -- directly sort a customer. So [indiscernible] the insurance on [indiscernible] have to charge minimum x. No, that is not there. So they are asking that what are you going to charge. So we have given [indiscernible] so that pricing on every company has given to the ensure product for fire essentially fire and within fire, you have given occupancy level that how would you look I say, pharmacies more at an occupancy level. And [indiscernible]. Obviously, companies who had a good attendance who also had good results and were able to give comfort on the pricing [indiscernible] forward and more significantly better conditions or commissions vis-a-vis the industry and obviously the quality of filing. So while there was a [indiscernible] the market may see a softening. It is the largest month as far as conversion in businesses are concerned. That seems to have gone well. We were expecting some site condition, which has happened. It's not a fall of pricing, and that was the application. So still, the first one has gone and we have to see how the balance rest of the year goes through. But I think that this is comforting to that, there's some similar of the pricing, that consistency is there. Equally, along with commercialize, it's not at fires negotiating the isolation of commercial in our customer looks at all the [indiscernible] together. So there's [indiscernible] with local heat. So I think that porfolio approach, all that balance as well as commission bank business is concerned is still on as what you had expected. So now going back to your growth portion, as I mentioned, so we discussed model. But commercial in is something which has grown than last year, and we have grown higher than the industry. And that continues to give [indiscernible] as coming is concerned, our object would be set that in order to find ways within that promotion segments it often to grow higher than interest. So to that extent, that...

Many insurance side, you've seen similar because it as inventory?

As I mentioned, I think as far as the cost increase is concerned, we have been able to beat a cost, which is slightly better than the industry. The hardening was there. Obviously, there was no way we could not have avoided any because it's a global event, but it has been better than the industry and commercial side significantly is built on a -- yes and informations are also overturned in the industry. So some companies have got a significant reduction in commission. So have also got punitive closes, which is a lost part of assuming taxes which you cannot quantify. The traditions attach say that [indiscernible] a loss order [indiscernible] RGI is not on the non-life side as a -- we're talking about the -- so insurance, if you see obviously, international [indiscernible].

So how much are you renting [indiscernible]

So depending on what kind of drop of [indiscernible] that you get from the insurance and what we did last year based on. It will depend [indiscernible]. The question is whether are you able to get terms for the risk that you are under -- that is very, very important. And two, whether the terms of commissions that you paid, are they reasonable within your update on. And third and more important is the point that we made actually whether any of your regions contracts have any [indiscernible] process. which is very important. If I'm going to get a precious contract, it says that in case the loss ratio is going to be between [indiscernible] to 90, if that's the rate of [indiscernible] and not by the insurer. So those negatives. Why will I [indiscernible] process, we were getting, let's say, a commission term which is looking better. That is work for. So that can significantly have both earnings and balance sheets. We don't have renewed those -- we don't have process in our patient. And neither has there been any significant impact to the commissions of ratios that we get. What has impacted us, which is slightly lower than what the [indiscernible] impact is. is on the risk that leading of the next cost that we expect to pay. That is slightly kind of retention growth is [indiscernible] cost on the risk that we retain.

Ask one question. So if you reinsure -- is that a yearly contract, which is to renew every year on new terms -- or is it...

Except some reinsurance arrangements, I need to say to do it is a multiyear contract to say that for protecting by, let's say, catastrophic events. I may say that until and whereas for a -- let's say, 3 year period.

So that's over and above your number.

That's over and above. For example, the way [ regional ] work his or is what is called a simple proportionate insurance. It is to say that being as an insurance company. Whatever is patently, X percentage of that is outlined to us in a part that I decided to do on a proportionate basis. For this system transfer, he gives me a commission on reinsurance.

So every year in charge, do you have the three partners or just one?

We have almost close to, I would say, 30, 40 reinsurance when we work it.

Got it. So how do you...

Depending on the various client businesses that we write.

So every line will have a different business?

As I said, on proportionate I will work with a set of insurer. Because even from a concentration standpoint, I would never want to place my entire range with 1 reinsurance part. I may consciously kind of give it across multiple range of responders for two objectives. One is the concentration this that you want to kind of get avoided with. Secondly, if I look at a beneficiary on commission terms, of parting with a small percentage with some other insurance partners without compromising the creditors, will he do all that? I'll work with some of those partners. So that's one type of reasons which why you have with multi-plan insurance company. Second is niche insurances. If It's a standard simple in water, health, typical property lines, every range should be willing to give capacity. But if there are aviation insurances, [indiscernible] Insurances, large risk insurances. Not every region will have the ability and the capacity to give those insurances for. So hence you look for reinsurance partners, who are willing to build the right amount of stress. Trains again, there are a number of insurances.

India as in reinsurances is only GIC.

Added insurance. Indian reinsurer is GIC. Let me just say that I am right. 4% have to be given for [indiscernible] .

And the rest of all the...

Rest you can decide, I'll explain to you, so one is GIC is an actual insurer and also not actually Indian insurer. So that 4% is mandatory. Now I have to look at my insurance program. Suppose I want to place X. I can take the terms either from GIC or the FRBs, which are the foreign branches of reinsurers. So there are some insurance.

In India, are there any other [indiscernible] other than GIC.

Yes, there are. So these are those -- so if you look at the Global -- the biggest insurance [indiscernible] will increase or and over all of them are branded. So now -- so they have a -- so there's a pegging order. One is the Indian reinsurer. These are known as FRBs. These are foreign reinsurance branches. And then there are cross-border insurance, which is you know CBRs. So I can place my business either with GST or with FRB or with the CBR. Now however, there is a preference order which has been defined, which is to basically promote people coming instead of shopping area. So for example, our leader is [indiscernible] , all proportions. On fire. So [indiscernible] We have units where standards for. So again, as Gopal mentioned, different reinsurers have different appetite for different kind of businesses. We also see that what works for us. So multiple factors go to the consideration. How good are they? What is the flexibility? What is the capacity that they can offer. It would also help me write more business. What is the claims paying capability to understand, do they understand that business? There are multiple factors that go into consideration and basis that we decide the panel of reinsurance. It is primarily an annual contract, as Gopal mentioned, because other contracts are also annual [indiscernible]. So that is our optics.

Yes. GIC and other [indiscernible]. Any other?

FRBs, foreign. non-indian.

Are you able to compete on...

There's a lot [indiscernible] so they always had a -- they have a high market share.

So this 40% to 60% price escalations, if I have understood correctly is something that goes across to board. So in the last year or so, were there any price escalations that...

That's only for FY '24. So this pricing -- so as I mentioned, this is a significant shift that has happened in the global reinsurance market. It has got nothing to do with India. Probably this is the hardening, the biggest hardening that we have seen in 10 years. So there was in 2 month that we had this WTC. It shifted the reinsurance market. And we had 2011 when you had -- so you had and you had earthquake crisis. you had Tohoku, so all of the Thiland, all these things happen in a very short period of time. That's why again, there was significant change in the insurance market. This is our third shift, which is a very significant shift because the claims have been a climate change and some of these things are attributed to that. So next year sorry. So what happens in 3 year. Negotiate with the reinsurers on polishable aspects. One is, are you able to get enough reinsurance capacity for me to riddance. That's the first thing that we have to go with. So then they have enough reinsurance partners who can write whichever is very abundant. Second, they negotiate on commercials, which is to say all the risk premium that I'm giving, which the region premium that I'm giving to reinsurer. What is it that you will give in returns to insurance. So that, again, every year, they kind of negotiate on the commercials. The third is we want what a U.S. insurance transporting you. There is some risk that [indiscernible]. What was this that I keep on mining it? India is specific to loss actions or in large losses. That is also going to be quite significant. In terms of my earnings volatility and balance sheet volatility. There, we take a further level of reinsurance protection for which you have to pay a cost. There, again, commercially, they work on the cost. To say, do I pay the optimal level of cost insurance. So it's a negotiation of three fronts: capacity, commercials on commission on reinsurance and regressive income and the cost of reinsurance that I have to pay for protecting. A combination of all these.

In the [indiscernible] Obviously this will remain nothing for a couple of months, I am saying they were doing...

Nothing as in?

So from Feb-March , it was that insurance rates are not really clear, but they were doing it on monthly basis is what they were renewing taking that because they may also have gone ahead of time to the reinsurers. And mostly, I think from our standpoint, I think one team has been there. So it was typically for our Indian markets, as you said, indian market experience is [indiscernible] . Globally, it's for [indiscernible] . So the fact that the rates are good, [indiscernible], It shouldn't be hardened is not around for subjects. Therefore, now it was a continuous one. We started our negotiations with the reinsurance commercials. So we were aware of the fact that this nature is something [indiscernible]. Because they would not have been able to close commercial negotiations. They would have possibly bought capacity waiver on monthly basis. To say that for the month of April, give me whatever, so many lines, these other terms, till the time they finalize their insurers.

And just a couple of other quick ones. One is take reduction part and acquisition, which we keep on talking about.

Right now, nothing that we can kind of talk about. If you recognize something obviously without that. But anything which is on the same lines of distribution investments that we are doing, we'll be happy to...

Looking to about 50%. Now is that enough.

They have said that they have got all options open. So hence, we have to wait and see. Right now, we have not heard any specific conversion to your first point. The conversation on what exactly we want to do. But right now they have kept all options. If, is of two things, right? So one is there is a dark guidance of opinions. So that 15-year term typically comes to an end in April 2024. And then as I said have been [indiscernible] years. That incidentally happens to be in 2024 time. Both of them kind of sound around very much the same time. 2 month here and there. You'll wait for the -- right now, there is new draft payments. We will get better clarity because at least what we understand is there are two other companies, which we had impacted before Bharat Bhusan. There are other CEOs who completed their term openings. So we will get to know what the regulatory thought on that is. But at the group level, again...

But that doesn't apply to the CEO.

That's also points in the year.

Is that even harder that eventually moves out debt.

So we wait and see as a Board and PFC, there is active [indiscernible]. Nothing to with these guideline. In general, management transition conversation happens at the Boards. So hence, the Board is reached off such transitions and maybe in a appropriate time whether it is within ICICI model or whether it is within the group. That's enough in hotels. They will come back in later.

And just on the combined ratio in [indiscernible] I was in Q4 , there was expectation that they will improve obviously relate to that extent and your kind of [indiscernible], you should have.

We have always spoken about not just Q4. In general, we had said [indiscernible]. Though insurance market was kind of expecting possibly something. So we don't know. So we said we are ready with which is what we kind of indirect. And so that is the next 2 years, we do want to see that come it down to and end.

But you see that 100 basis points each year or...

Specifically get into the breakdown of the objective will be to obviously kind of get an implement reflected, but there is exactly what I'm saying when something happened in the first year and obviously, -- and what we are saying is what I mentioned, which is if the market gets far more reasonable earlier, then we obviously won't accelerate -- that's not business.

Does marginal improvement, the bulk of it will possibly come through the...

As I said, we will obviously want to see that, good news some of the investments, which had already been a cost we now pay in a 12-month time. They are seeing signs of incremental revenue growth. We wanted to get us in of 6 months, all around 6 months we are growing not just faster. Of course, they've been growing positive interest. But we are also growing faster in the [indiscernible] of it. So you need to understand that early science. And there is a saying a much, much longer period of time. Since we continue to make those investments, which will be there in the quarter. But the revenue increment is starting to play out. We are quite happy to reality of time. ICICI is always has been contributing to a single-digit overall revenues. That still continues to remain the same. While they are still not distributing retail benefit the decision that take up about 3 years back. So they are not longer -- they still do not distribute retail benefit. But obviously, distributing [indiscernible] Which is why overall contribution of the bank to the aggregate revenues, that's increasing them. All Axis and HDFC. Both of them have done very good. The apprehension in the market had that may not be continuing branches. They have continued to stay with us. And two, it is also know that Baltic ex had bought these franchises several years back. For example, HDFC is supposed to just 3 years [indiscernible] announced it. Axis was much more a reset, but they were 18 months in all that had prospect. A single-digit presentation in wallet share. at the time when [indiscernible] has got the deals. Today, 2 years into it, from the time we got all the [indiscernible] , we have been able to get to double-digit market share or let's say nobody's wallet sharing both those spends. Both of them had done very well, and this is mix products, they're really [indiscernible]. As they're largely prominently retail some action on their distribution units.

So this is also filed...

It's a fantastic change that we will be able to [indiscernible]. And then Again, the key is for us to be able to kind of sustain and continue to increase volume. Pension was there in [indiscernible].

Exactly what that ratio was. The result is pretty much there for everyone to see.

There's a lot more for us to do. I think particularly, both the banks are very, very demanding in terms of the expectation from the insurance partners. And the good news is, in general, both of them have foreign offsite. As you see, even at that point of time, they always have three like three general [indiscernible] . And access was in the process of kind of adding more partners to the open market. Now with the bank, architecture further opened up right now the banking license of [ Brunei ] comes each. I'm not saying every vacuole work at night. But at least there is enough time to more than HDFC and Axis. We will obviously look for both bank partners to get at. Getting that early traction. So the early conversations are very encouraging. So once it correctifies into a new addition, obviously, we will make it into the management. But the conversations are all...

There been more options, right?

There are enough and more options for us. I think obviously, we have to make sure that finance on a commercial standpoint as well. I mean, as we keep saying, we can always double our market share in 6 months. By that, the cost. So we always strive to strike a balance.

So many in several companies talk about the [indiscernible]. You're still on a virtual market and we struggle with some of the CEOs they have appointed, obviously, when it come on would change. By now, it will not be. So we've been pursuing certificating [indiscernible] but thinking about where we are, it seems the volumes and your [indiscernible] is going to be impacted now. What are you using...

Growth of retention is pretty much there.

It basically just getting...

Secondly, as you rightly mentioned, the development of that segment have to go toward cycles because it's -- and rightly mentioned by you only on the portfolio matures is when your true lights forward, I'll explain it and you'll have a better idea. And if to manage it, if we're going to continue to exhibit reasonable price increases, again, point that you made of, we were able to continue to retain a larger proportion customers will protest. Those are things that the market has not seen. So when there's vacancy and that's something that we believe an opportunity for us because we are not a very large space, which is about 3%. We may be would again some [ 0.12% ] market share over the last 6 months in that direction. So hence, we feel that's a great opportunity to be in. Second, while it may be a life insurance act, the government changed, the very fact that I was talking about, they can make the open architecture in the available script. Which has been one of the core regulatory arbiter that the stand alone company fail. If this change goes through, again, it's an extremely positive development for players like us. That's what we're again kind of looking at it very, very positively. The third is the fundamental shift from a pure retention insurance into more, much more comprehensive health insurance offering that is the operating one of the elements, which combined wil eventually is operation units. [indiscernible] because we talk about the U.S. and we do not happen [indiscernible] . So we have a vacancy on that. I think our thought process is, I think what we have been able to exhibit on commercial lines is exactly what we're thinking about the ,which is, predominantly see ourselves a small service litigation/management partner and all see our suggested your risk transparent partner. And the entire instance is [indiscernible] so that you don't result into a loss situation. And therefore, the price point for renewable and longevity of the customer with an insurance company [indiscernible] same focus is what we are executing on the operating side, which is to say that we will work significant or prevention business. And the hypothesis is, if that goes well, it will logically result in to a reduced number of hospitalization over long time. We're not making it in right now on number something. You will see how this [indiscernible] . Hence, a lot of our investments are going into definitive and wellness. That's 1 positive is what we are [indiscernible] The second good news is why originally, we saw higher take care have to be more health only offering, whether it is servicing or sourcing which is why over the last 3 earnings call, people have been asking that cross-sell revenue numbers. People have kind of largely [indiscernible] That platform. And now they are saying quite on you also make available most of the retail line to the were created in prior some of those retailers on [indiscernible] And therefore, it is not just a 1 line of business and a relatively lesser engagement offering that we are doing. Typically, insurance buying in a much more boring cost, right? You just buy a policy and claim happens has been kind of reach out. But time to create that capability to a much more involved interactive sessions across political aspects. Promotes a lot more business in privative elements. So that's what we're exhibiting. So we're seeing a lot more engagement with customers. And we're also seeing the potential for an increased cross-sell opportunity as well. The combination of both is what we think should largely work, but we don't see how the market happens [indiscernible]. Go to -- and they transact and is, therefore, we obviously have to wait and see next information and continues completely. And that number from 3 to 9. It was not an insurance active change. Whereas this agency that insurance sector and next year is [indiscernible] so we have to wait and see how that particular change pace.

So maybe you want to be back in there.

It depends I mean, the base [indiscernible] The regulatory change is kind of driving things, he has been able to [indiscernible]. But in [ change ], we're also working with the regulator is to retail. Remember, we had also talked about the slide. We reduced nuance of point-of-sale persons which was not the same [indiscernible] Going to a licensing process to get someone on boarded. But it obviously comes with some conditions and guidance to say that we can only sell to resource policies up to a particular some issue, which we don't think is at that point in time, it was introduced was share definitely given the increased requirement of the [ ] leverage should go up. That's which is the annuity space. Even if they do that, again, that's a very positive development in the intent, the time that they will take to possibly change the agency. To aid or should kind of gain. Then the question is how much you're able to kind of work on the distribution and leverage on it. At least it opens up the opportunity for material [indiscernible] because...

The margin everyone does it obviously higher then mention [indiscernible] .

It's like a motor to its agency everywhere. It's a portion of who is able to work on the distribution and able to source and service gains.

And USP you're saying is already right now.

The USP is already [indiscernible] Yes, we allow you to source of to buy a [indiscernible] so that's underlying. But again, there are cash on each of those lines we also allow it on the motor as well. But then again, there is a cap on some insured that we can source. So different segments, different customers. Our ask from the regulator should relook at those limits, which is current age. If it goes up meaningfully, then in the interim until the time, let's say, this agency licensing process propose a change to insure that coming [indiscernible] this can be [indiscernible] for us. My sense is, given the penetration levels on health, there is enough of course. I think CS players who want to then actually invested without trying to cut corners on [indiscernible] . First year obviously drops because not everyone plays a gain. It's [ 70%, 80% ] first year would be between [ 55% to 60% ]. And the second year will be upwards of 85% and 80% because they experience some of the framework here. This is retail. And our motor again, depending on segment to segment what prioritize the number will be between 45% to 50% for the first year. Subsequent years, again, thanks to Indian loans, 1 in 3 private cars supposedly. So therefore, if the experience is both in the proportion of passion facility, that much higher 60%, 70% but on a [indiscernible]. In our 2-wheeler, typically only 1 out of the ones I mean I'm talking about 1 year policy. Now everything is 5 years. So therefore, 5 year its 10% situation. So now we are [indiscernible] It's more on hardly people renew it in the next second day. [indiscernible] Are kind of, I would say, managing this because they...

It was very interesting stopping this PSP question [indiscernible] I said how the customer...

We have ready to own [indiscernible] was 100% or 90%. There may be still element of [indiscernible] . What you're saying is right? So some extent, I don't know whether [indiscernible] compliance on the ground we saw, let's say, completely there.

60%, 65% [indiscernible] .

The good news is, I think the election to find that what we need to pay for not having an insurance is still depending upon. So [indiscernible ] we clearly realized the importance of having insurance level. But according to huge it should be 100% [indiscernible] 100% for all categories of...

In the market, it's 90%.

It's 50% are not insured. 50% overall number of vehicles is not [indiscernible].

What do you think of you next week for motor and so they can be differential pricing based on the driver experience, it would be [indiscernible] .

Today, if you look at those who are allowed to be [indiscernible] . We exhausted that very quickly, but some of it is quite good. Today, now on each of those elements, whether it is pay based on -- or based on how driving school [indiscernible] . All it is some of the relatively offset of customers who have multiple difference, having differential [indiscernible] Where we're getting the benefit of what we call single policy, 1 single date for [indiscernible] Remember. You get a benefit of a better price because all the vehicles are not used with the same vehicles.

But I don't see that in my motor policy I don't see that.

That our indecisions what I would call, but obviously offering exist, which is to say that, for example, if you are a private car and, [indiscernible] , for example, earlier, you would have had 2 separate annual days 2 different premiums to pay and then in the process, we will lose 1 of the consumers, [indiscernible] To date. Will those be ported 1 policy document, which we call [indiscernible] .

Then unless it's used across different companies.

It will [indiscernible] for example, if you are having both those assets. We would not want you to be lost for it's any [indiscernible] the insurance offering. So let's say, if you move to [ Bajaj ] for your 2-wheeler insurance, we hope we are quite renew a 4 wheeler. That's a lot of questions for us. So the whole objective was to have a [indiscernible] insurance, which combines all the assets at 1 customer. You 1 single date. So the customer...

In this case, [indiscernible] .

I think it's more inefficient on our part, we have not been able [indiscernible] market.

Because only accounts contract advantage.

And the advantage for you as a customer, you get a better mix. But today, on motor, KYC assortment. Effective 1st of January 2023, as we speak, 5 months. [indiscernible] no matter for a policy in the resource. So we were able to track consumer -- they are issuing the asset. That change will happen, which is why we keep saying analytics data is a very, very important role. So with PIC being mandatory all the reason for us to be contracted.

And this [indiscernible] has now been across insurance .

Across the insurance. Effective 1st of January.

So the ones which are actually ahead on the data analysis [indiscernible].

We went otherwise even before [indiscernible].

How would they be advantage because they will then have to start easing policies differently versus currently versus [indiscernible].

We can use a [indiscernible] advantage for example, even...

If I supposed I'm a good driver give me a better [indiscernible] . But if I'm a bad one or some other company, which is [indiscernible].

But it depends on the last 6 years eventually. If you continue to exhibit unfavorable outcome, unless that company is willing to [indiscernible] but knowing most of the companies are [indiscernible] we have not been so irresponsible to continuously [indiscernible] to be a long period of time. [indiscernible] at some point in time. And where they can carry price is only 1. On third party, I don't have -- none of this, the market has got the pricing decision. It's defined by tariffs. So in which is a large part of your tariff premium sorry, large portion of premium is already there. Well, you cannot do anything. You can do the sale conference. There you can choose this segment to underwrite and you're already going to price for it or on average, you can choose to price. So there, it's a function of what [indiscernible] comfortable with.

Then do you think the company [indiscernible]?

In terms of?

In terms of more and more driver getting [indiscernible].

All these 3[indiscernible] Based on the reason that you travel. Which is Pay-as-you-drive, which is based on the additions that w [indiscernible] as a customer, you can opt for those as an add-on in which case, we get the benefit of the lower price. But right now, all of these are very, very small proportion of the overall perception.

I haven't seen that.

The important thing for companies like us is while you, as our customer gets a benefit of pricing because you offer all of this we need to make sure that we price for the national segment proper is across subsidiary. Otherwise, for the overall [indiscernible] Revenue will shrink. We need to make sure that the rest of the sequels are appropriately priced. Is a very, very small post.

So then the credit has to become over that is when you will start advertising.

This is why you said. Today to see the experimentation period was 10,000 policies [indiscernible] And the examination period for us for 6 months under the sandbox guidelines. 3 months, we have [indiscernible] it was an update. Okay.

I bet you for the question terms. I understand thank you all. So what happens across the world [indiscernible].

Insurance is on the customer. India is also really weak market investment [indiscernible] On the Western world and predominantly, if you are accident. Your premiums get quality to the action [indiscernible] . Here, there is nothing like the first place we don't even know how many people have driven the same vehicle. You could be done by a softer, you may drive to indecent some of your family members use the same vehicle. There is some [indiscernible].

Is it possible to [indiscernible].

It will change.

What is just an asset being driven by the driver and me. Then QIC will be on me not on the driver.

So that depends on who are you insuring. If you're ensuring the asset then what you said is right. If insuring you as a customer, I will start capturing your asset.

Which is better to go be the asset or the...

Both of them are good. [indiscernible] Price for a problem. Neither 1 is good or bad. Insurance is all about making sure that once you get a larger pool of people to take insurance so that you are able to get the benefit of price to customers. Only a select set of people come and take insurance. One, it results into a higher price. And two, sometimes it can be, selected. So let's say someone who's only having a bad health or ill health who only goes to insurance. That's terrible for us. Because then we will end up with a very adverse loss experience and we can price also very high. So health, which is what we keep saying. Insurance is all about large numbers. The more the universe is insured it is better so the risk perspective and from a pricing standpoint.

So when do you see in India that makes the motor part of it. How I still think there's some more time. But do you think -- because now some like commodities.

So if you look at compliance rates in the past, don't insure them for wariness because there was no digitized record of registration of vehicles and let's say, insurance information. They are not talking to each other. Both of them are operating as a separate databases. Today, those services have been linked. For example, I don't know whether you have doubled in your [indiscernible]. You can see your registration details of the vehicle and also your insurance dates. And today, the traffic cop takes both. I don't know that you have seen. Action of compliance by the power also is very high because they have this unified economy. Immediately, they are able to figure out whether the vehicles that they've bought has an insurance or not. And today, the amount of 55 that you have between were not having an insurance cover is, in fact, higher than taking a 2 wheeler insurance. It is much better off to take a insurance cover has it been.

And if this happens, this [indiscernible]

Reports have been linked for the last 12 months, So you can see whether the vehicle of yours has got insurance lower for what period.

Idea just to catch up. And so I think last time we had discussed a few thoughts on how things shape up in 2023, 2024 in terms of industry dynamics, how the company sort of populate a profitability and then overall growth just as the improves. So just to want to quickly catch up on the slide. And then I think a question around the impact of the your guideline again. And then there was this 1 more point that we were wondering on is relating to IAS/IFRS. Some companies [indiscernible] Highlighted that it will help them on the sorbent front and also overall ROEs can move up by 200 to 400 basis points. We just wanted to hear the outwards.

So first on overall in terms of I think you've given a guidance light part towards improvement of profitability. I just wanted to hear your thoughts if what can accelerate this journey or what can delay this journey? So both sides of composition.

Actually it's a function of [indiscernible]. So as we have been at least kind of indicating the last couple of earnings calls, on [indiscernible] , things seems to be getting better, especially when you look at even the industry combined numbers. For motor, it was [ INR 124 ] in H1 for quarter 3, it was [ 11% ]. So direction, it seems to indicate, Q4, we still don't have all players reported numbers. Once we get the numbers for everyone, then we will be able to be better in around direction rate seems to indicate some [indiscernible] that's coming to. So hence, the direction that's supported that could accelerate. If players get further reasonable. And to that extent, it can accelerate the 102% expiration material. What can kind of delay this. I think again, if you look at the regulators thought process is in the drive to increase penetration, we are talking about adding collections, the vacancies, what type of licenses or what type of companies come into the pay to get the set. 20 days, let's say, only a something. So if you see only some niche companies in niche geographies, niche product lines, then it doesn't damage us so much. But if it's large multiline pan-India player, who is willing to burn capital for long periods of time. And obviously, that can have an impact. So those are things that can delay. But otherwise, as we see right now, things seem to be kind of looking up in the way how things are going that's.

On both side, it's the competition.

Particularly for us, the way we are positioned, I think we have continued to stay invested in distribution, claims service and technology, right? That's something which is irrespective of whatever call that we've taken on growing the book. We have continued to making arrangements.

And just an extension to this on the competitive intensity and 1 of the questions was on the EON guideline. How do you sort of see -- I know it's initial days been like almost 45 days into it. But just overall.

See, if you look at the earlier guidelines, it had multiple kind of requirements in the portfolio, right? You hire to be compared at aggregate level. And then there are limits for different lines of business. Thereon, clearly, the reaction the regulators taken is to just monitor the companies on bonding to limit and expense management. Now if you see [indiscernible] We always within that threshold of [indiscernible] And therefore, going ahead, it does not put us into any total disability then it puts us into advantage primarily because there are many players in the market who are already operating at EM, more than [indiscernible] . While there is a big part of 3 years to state for them, it cannot -- it's not going to be that they certainly executed light or a reduction only in the third year. The regulator is going to ask them the most rate reduction in expense management, right from year 1. So even if it is a correction of 4%, 5%, for example, which is a positive development. It's a ABC. So hence, the new AM guidelines [indiscernible] It's an extremely positive medium to long-term outcome. And hence, we again believe we should be recipient of.

And anything you think that -- so there are some thoughts from certain players that it may increase competition on the commercial line. So growth as well because basically, the denominator...

You're absolutely right. But having said that, what can happen is 1, 2 companies have the ability to spend more. That is true, provided companies are operating at a combined of [indiscernible] and we you look at every player in the market, we are significantly operating in combines, which are already in [indiscernible] can they afford to trend more assets clearly a move. Right? Now will that lead to, let's say, an increased competition on some of the other lines of businesses, possibly, yes. Let's say, in your own example of crop or let's say, commercial lines. But even on commercial lines for example, with a change that has happened of doing away with an IP benchmark rate already put stress on pricing. So therefore, the ability of them to continue to play possibly on the commercial lines is not going to be easy. And to unlike motor or health, which are relatively smaller ticket exposures where even if a loss happens, it's not going to put you to so much of strain. We can't take the same risk call with a big exposure portfolio, whether it is commercial lines or whether it is crop, both of them are very high on exposure. Because for you to gain some market share, you will pay, let's say, a higher expense management. It shows very [indiscernible] Which is to say in the short term, it can be still challenging, but some players exactly do what is right? We start restructuring the impact of it in the next couple of years.

In the next 12 months, these things may be [indiscernible] But 2025 probably things should be...

How long and these are very, very positive development for the market development. And just 1 last one, and there's something I was discussing with [indiscernible] As well. It seems like this guideline will basically make the smaller player even more weaker eventually. Do you think that could be an outcome because basically, the large ones have a particular brand distribution network.

Other today, some extent, it is select. But having said that, everything also boils down to what kind of claim practices you execute an outcome. They're going to follow a clearing practice, which is significantly using them or anticonsumer, but then it can have long-term implications on you, even though we may be a very strong time. What the customers will value is the ability of the [indiscernible] . And on that, if you start doing compromises, that may not sustain irrespective of your leadership position. It definitely does put companies to an advantage, which are relatively larger in scale because, as you mentioned, economics of scale play out for those players. But in the long end, what will matter more is the ability of the company to be able to make the claim expectation of policy users. And there, clearly, we see a rich back in the market. There are large players, particularly on the head side who have [indiscernible] On claims. And hence, their customer feedback is not so great. Be able to sustain, let's say, market position alone.

And the other point was on the new motor vehicle at I think the last time when we mentioned, you had mentioned that it will take time for you to conclude which way it's headed. How do you...

Even now there's contingent. Unfortunately, that's exactly the reason why we said it will take a lot right longer wear for it to play out. Already confident it is between codes and hence, that extent, hopefully, the battle will get settled at the Supreme Court level then it should happen. And then our sets can the 6-month periods be rolled back later very, very [indiscernible]. So hence it will take time, which is why even the latest earnings call, we said we are not factoring in any change to our reserving estimates just because of the benefit that is going to accrue from the [indiscernible] we can see the development. And then take the call of property.

And is it when it moves to a more stable environment, what kind of structural...

So benefit will be more to us, companies like us. Like what kind of 100, 200 basis because, for example, if you look at the inflation assumption price number base in the number, which is 13%. While publicly, we don't have the numbers for the other companies because it's not a mandatory disclosure. But our market [indiscernible] says most of them carry a single-digit inflation assumption. Obviously anywhere between 7% to 8%. So that's the data we gets in terms of the advantage that it comes to us because we will be able to obviously reverse results of 12%, 13% that we have held, at least from April 22, which is what the indicative period of implementation or effectiveness -- effective date is concerned. Even then we'll be able to get that benefit.[indiscernible] If they are through [indiscernible] or reversals, it will be on the inflation assumption that they've made.

So on the PPE part of the portfolio, there is about 500 basis points of release that can happen due to [indiscernible].

This what we expect. But as I said, this will be obviously applicable only on those cases, which are effective of the 1st April [ receipt ] while Madras high court has gone one step ahead and said the savings also apply to live policy as of 1st April. So -- in which case they've said even for live exposure, the risk cash will be implemented within 6 months or 1st April [indiscernible]. The validity is already over. So technically, you cannot get any claim for the earlier tickets. In that [indiscernible] challenged is what our sense. But in all banners, the effectiveness of 1st April '22, hopefully remains [indiscernible]. And hence, for that period until we should be able to get the different shipment.

That's it. So now just where we are and with these companies coming for IPO, do you think this -- if all else being equal, we are likely to go back to that 100% at 2 to 3 years.

You obviously want to take [indiscernible] Rohit. I think right now, we are obviously -- what we had said was when we announced the transaction, we said we want to get down to closer 104%. And that's exactly what we've been able to deliver. And now over the last 12 months or so, we have been saying you also move to 104 % to 119%, 500 by FY '25. That's it. So we want to make sure that we are able to deliver on that. And then, of course, the path to staying disciplined on writing is remaining the same. It's not that we are saying we are going aggressive on the top line growth. Of course, we don't say on course with the balanced view. So we will take one step at a time, see how the market responds. As we keep saying, if the market responds better earlier, then the time plan of even the 102% get accelerated.

Sitting today, you don't see 100%, 101% in FY '25. That's not something which is...

As you said, we will have to wait and see how the market is [indiscernible]. We're not seeing that signs for us to get the acceleration there as we speak. So we see signs of market reading far more reasonable and sensible. And of course, that [indiscernible] aspiration will be accelerated.

On the pricing environment as you talked about motor pricing and held, I think some of the players have already indicated a significant [indiscernible] significant price to lead this. Overall, and on the other side, the reinsurance rates have gone up significantly. So how do you see the overall pricing landscape?

So multiple segments exhibit different pricing environment, right? So let's take it for example. So I think if you remember, the good news is now you don't have to go to the regulator for a [indiscernible]. So it's only [indiscernible] things. Therefore and obviously, we look for the portfolio development over periods. For example, when we did the price division in quarter 3 of 2021. At that point of time, we had done a weighted average price increase of 8%, the overall portfolio. But that price increase of 8% was done after 4, 5 years of loss development. Now from there on to this layer, which is roughly about 3 years [indiscernible]. We have again been monitoring the portfolio development. There is the impact of COVID losses plus there has been gained inflation, which is there on crop. Since we have kind of talked about affecting the pricing. And that again, when we did that 8% price division, we had done end of month. Most of the case, the market did the subsequent [indiscernible]. So now, again, in last 2, 3 years, we've been developing for the loss experience. And today, when we look at the overall portfolio to deliver the loss ratio range that we have spoken about. We have affected a price revision of the receivable book of about 90%, which, if you look at it for more to the market participants, the number has been slightly higher. So hence, we believe we should be able to get some incremental market share, which is why in last 4 out of 6 months, our growth has been faster than not just the industry, even amongst the standard of income [indiscernible]. And that's exactly what we want to monitor and continue in terms of growth acceleration. There [indiscernible] matter underwriting outcome that we are looking at. And at the same time, we have been able to give confidence on the investment outcome that we have made on the retail expansions. So that's how pricing environment is playing on retail. On border, as we've been saying, TP is a regulatory risk equipment. Still at least for '23, '24, no price change has been announced. So [indiscernible] status quo. Last year for '22, '23, the price division was affected as you remember, which was roughly with having increase of single digit. Now we'll wait and see whether they do a similar kind of a change for '23, '24 or not. All indications point out to the need for a price change upwards. Because while they were positive on the TP rules. But equally, we have seen TP claim inflation to be increasing. Because one incidence took an action that has changed. But more importantly, the average gain size has actually gone. Because the courts are apically been giving a favorable order or benevolent order in favor of [indiscernible]. So hence, there's a logical visitor the price to improve, which we have not seen so far or '23, '24. That's a slight drag because we will still build an attrition without a price change. So that's a drag on the lot of issues. So hence, we have to reselect portfolio is far better. So that's the pricing environment for TP. All OD [indiscernible] market which is very, very competitive because they have risk [indiscernible]. And today, when I said the market is getting reasonable on pricing, on motor, there is two impacts. One, there is some improvement in pricing done by players in the market. And two they have been getting far more conscious on the expense of management. It's a combination of both, which is where we, again, believe there's an opportunity for us to grow motor. And that's the reason, unlike the last couple of years, where we have lost market share on motor in the aggregate. This year, we're expecting us to grow in line with the industry numbers on motor. That is the expectation that we have.

Not fast as...

You first want to come in line with the market because you have lost market share in the last 2 years. We want to come in line with the industry this year. Hopefully, we will not lose any opportunity to grow faster in the environment [indiscernible]. But as of now, taking care [indiscernible]. So that's the environment for pricing more in our motor. On commercial lines, as we have indicated a couple of impacts. One is this whole IIB regime, which was a float low price base regime that existed until 1st April '23. That's a part of the reason as contracts. There was also the IIB-refined growth rates, which acted as some kind of a price card so far as arrange underwriting insurances are concerned. Today when I said no more -- you cannot have those IIB depend float bases [indiscernible] issuance. That by itself means pricing reduction. So the expectation is obviously one that expected a significant price draw. But on the [indiscernible] side even that [indiscernible] there has been a lot of extra [indiscernible] are hardened particularly on protecting the catastrophic led production. The increases has been in the 40% to 60%. For us the impact would be slightly lower. But for other players in the market, the impact definitely far more higher either in the [indiscernible] increased cost of reinsurance. All they have been -- they have terms, which are far more periodic as compared ICICI Lombard. So -- and now aggregate, we'll not obviously wait for given that this development is just [indiscernible] 1st April. Very early days. So the companies either renew their policies on first April or first of January. So either they follow a financial year or calendar year as a cycle of insurance [indiscernible]. Initial signs seems to indicate a single-digit price drop. Consequent this IIB rate reduction and the fact that there is some element of cost pass-through that we have been able to do because of the reach of the [indiscernible] So a combination of both has resulted to a single-digit price reduction on pricing for [indiscernible] .

If you want to spend a minute to explain this IIB related, how does it go? And I'm not able understand...

If you remember in 2019, when the reinsurance side looked at whether to offer or whether we continue to offer insurance capacity, right? They have experienced losses in that portfolio. And therefore, they are saying in terms have to be renewed, the reinsurances will be only offered at a particular base price to the primary companies like us. So if we are to work with let's say x, y, z reinsurance company, x, y, z reinsurance company will say for this reinsurance capacity, you have to price for the risk at so much, so much [indiscernible] price. It acted like a base price or a float price. And therefore, that was a significant increase compared to what the price has existed earlier, which is why in the year 2019 and 2020, the increase in the prior group that it was of course of 25%, 30% for the market. And we grew faster than because pricing improved. So in terms float price. Just now really recently regulator has come back and said to renew reinsurance contract, you cannot have that in the float price. It was [indiscernible] price segment because it's a [indiscernible] to price segment. So market rate determines what's should be the price. When market determines logical expectation is price to collapse. But given that, again, this is not a segment which is like motor [indiscernible] small ticket risk, it's high-ticket exposures. You can't have a steep fall in price reduction. So, the price reduction is to whatever extent. But to compensate for this price drop, there is an increase in the reassurance rate hardly. Cost of bond, which also has been passed through to [indiscernible]. Therefore, on balance, the overall drop in pricing for prior, this is [indiscernible] company.

What is the cumulation increase from 2019?

Roughly, as I said, the growth -- the pricing improvement was quite reasonable. So buyers, we should generally see a growth rate of about 14%, 15%, had seen a growth of almost about 25% to 30% for the market. It again varies between segments to segment. I'm not giving you numbers because depending on which sector you had exposure to price change was that's going to be related to that.

I'm saying in the '20, you would have taken 25%, 30% hike and then '21, '22 also where there's hikes or...

No, there will be one time hike.

So basically, you mentioned gained about 5 percentage point approximately.

Net-net for ICICI Lombard we have been dissipated of accretion in market share on commercial lines.

So I'm saying on pricing, you like to like pricing, unadjusted for market share gain....

Within the first time of renewal rate. We need to wait and see how the market responds. And also be able to see what happens to the insurance rates next year. If reinsurance rates gets offered, then again, the terms of reinsurance, we have to go a change. So there are multiple factors that play a little.

We -- a little bit to cost. And so I wanted to understand, so one is the composition of 102% combined between loss and uptakes that you have in mind. And in general, and I am sitting with [indiscernible] also on this that directionally, as companies grow in scale, there has to be some operating leverage visible. I mean, yes. So a company like Lombard with 10% market share, I mean, let's say, a couple of years, we'll be about 10% blended market share. What kind of cost you should operate at, I mean what OpEx ratio?

So when you say the direction combined improvement to [indiscernible] obviously, expansions one of the factor. The fact that today we are making a lot of investments, which has resulted into an upgrading of cost. So for example, we'll be exiting retail 10 franchise. We are adding employees. Those employees are yet to become productive in terms of revenue. So -- and hence to that extent, as even revenues come through you will see a efficiencies or economies of scale playing out. So that will be a benefit out on the expense ratio print. And similarly, when we are making an investment in technology, today, currently, they are undergoing to business transition project [indiscernible] for the future. Those costs are hitting me today. The revenues will come through over the next 2, 3 years. So again, it will be a factor of the overall [indiscernible] numbers. So all in all, as you scale, there has to be efficiency improvements, which is why, again, not just 1 or 2 years. Over 15 years from 2008 to 2023 if you look at our headcount number, in 2008, the peak headcount was 18,000. Today, even with Bharti [indiscernible] numbers, we are at 14,000, it's down almost 25%. But my policy volumes have increased by 9x from paying taxes.

There are an absolute number that -- so this INR 4,500 crores cost that you had in FY '23, is there -- excluding the commission -- net commission, is there an absolute number beyond which, let's say, there is -- there's going to be like a massive operating [indiscernible] will track. The way we track [indiscernible], obviously, we will want to see our management expenses growing lower than the growth in revenues.

That's efficiency that [indiscernible], this will happen from action. And we're saying that's something that we will monitor. Unfortunately, today, the base expense gets recognized, the cost [indiscernible] today. But as my revenue will pay through all of [indiscernible] time. Once that happens automatically things will change.

What's the in front of that, I mean just to understand, we haven't specifically got the number as to what will be a for [indiscernible], for example, they have close to 10 percentage points difference between reported and actual would that number be similar for us?

So again, it's a function -- as I said, you have not done the number so far yet. Again, it will depend on what kind of the growth that you exhibit for the future. It will be a function of all of that. Second, it will also be a function of how many or proportion of long-term policy set in your overall product mix. So there are multiple factors associated with it before you can really tell what the impact of that is. But more than that, the bigger impact when we to transition to IFRS will be on discounting of reserves. That will have a much better impact.

But right you don't discounting?

We're discounting the reserves on a nominal basis, even for a long-tail line of business, like motor TP for example, right. So the impact is far more on discounting of reserves as compared to temporary acquisition cost. So anyone who's telling you that the impact on that will be a very large number. I don't think that is -- in that it's a correct statement to make.

I think from a health perspective, maybe -- it may be right because they don't have long tenure liabilities but maybe.

[indiscernible] perspective we've to see only long-term policies today 1%, 2%, which cannot then translated to a 10% impact on that. So I don't mitigate, the number doesn't kind of fit in, at least [indiscernible] I'm sure they're done...

You would have said [indiscernible] saying but [indiscernible] side is a growth rate, the pace of growth. Will that make a big difference in the fourth quarter, lumpy, higher?

So -- I think coming to our stated objective, I think if you asked us transitioning to IFRS will be far more on the resale side because of discounting. The impact of that, I don't think will be it will be [indiscernible]. But I have said that, that will obviously be a positive on the [indiscernible]

And coming back to original [indiscernible] and that impact is not a big part. so then this OpEx rate will grow at a reasonable pace, whether it will launch be like a big level of operating leverage. Let's say in 5 years, you will not be like 23, 24 [indiscernible]

Operators are rating leverage for us is the increase revenues that we will generate all the investments that we have done in the past months. For example, when I said -- when we have been saying we added 1,000 employees on the health side. The cost of the 1,000 employees is already big. My revenue was 0 at that point in time. As my revenue starts coming in the next 12 to 18 months, automatically there is growing of scale. [indiscernible] And the more I continue to do, forgot that, Without that I am Saying. When my Investment starts to play out on revenues there's efficiency or there's an improvement in expense ratio. And that will activate. And for that, there are variable factors, growth rate, long-term bonuses, which month do you need source the policy side. All of them will have affect.

So is it fair to make in, let's say, 3 years' time, the maximum gain that we make on OpEx ratio would let's say, 200 basis points maximum and then thereafter...

For us the improvement on combined is what we largely monitor.

Combined to what?

To be a function of both expense ratios and loss ratio. Because the reason again, I'm not giving you this because there are some segments of businesses which will be high on LR.

I understand. I understand.

So a combination of both.

Got it. Just quickly to floor. We guided -- I think we discussed this last time as well. So obviously, the floor generation -- pace of floor generation has gone down compared to what we used to do historically partly because combined. See, overall, let's say, in this downward rate cycle, if we were there in the second half of this year, our float income to sort of move. So one...

Then we download as the intrusive cycle or not, we don't know. So we'll have to wait and see for that. But whatever you're talking about the rates is a only [indiscernible] . So as you will see how things play out. But having said that, I think there are, again, multiple factors that contribute to the floor. So one is the combined issue point that you rightly mentioned. The fact that I'm directionally going to combine to 104% 102%, itself it's a positive investment leverage. So that's going to improve my investment leverage. The second is the entire uncertainty around how the motor segment will play out. If motor start to come back and if you are able to continue to drive growth, that [indiscernible] will again further improved leverage. There's an element of uncertainty attached to that. The third is how the motor third party, let's say, price increases with deal. If motor TP does not show a gaining full price change, then obviously, it will be slightly drive on investment float. For us, longer-term TP cover does give us higher equation leverage. So we have to wait and see how that plays out. The fourth element is with respect to composition of business. If, let's say, incrementally do more of health and less of motor, then that will have an impact on my investment leverage. And the last point is motor third-party rules. Once motor third-party rules, it's a drag on investment leverage. But it's a positive [indiscernible].

Before this point what were the [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] health is relatively a low -- ROE low leverage segment. So more than growth doesn't come back, but health continues to grow faster. It will have an impact on leverage. So which is why I cannot tell you with certainty as to what will the number for the investment leverage. As of now, it looks like maintaining a 4x leverage seems to be doable leverage on balance.

On balance. Just last point on this is -- so what's the glide part to 18% and...

We've already have 18% leverage. We already had 17%, 18% leverage.

17 %, 18%?

ROE, I think. We already have 17%, 18%.

Last year, I think...

Last year was COVID.

So we are at about yes, 17%, 17-odd percents.

We've already that's exactly the range that we spoke about. We had 104% built in that range of 16% to 18%. as we improve the combined from 104% to 102%, a range of our should be between 18% to 20%. But again -- this again depends on the function of growth.

If you're 17%, 18%.

We have always said a 20% ROE is what seems to be a reasonable and a sustainable one. 24% and others could be one-off in that year, we would have had some impact, some benefits. Long-term sustainable, we have always said maintain the 20% ROE seems to be doable.

And that will be core only, largely core -- with maintaining leverage but largely core.

[indiscernible] both, investments plus underwriting. Good. And to your point, if the rate starts to get moderated, going ahead then obviously, we can't afford to run the business at an elevated and writing outcome. We have to get better on writing then. But for the market, this will be a far more important change than us because their combined is far more relevant.

Any changes that we're making to the investment policy?

Doable change [indiscernible]

No it does have asset allocation.

That's always something that we keep evaluating. For example, if our mix of equities currently that will between 10% and 11%. At the peak, payback [indiscernible] levels because we saw an opportunity to go up to the levels.

I think in COVID also so you have increased the...

To 11% plus. Because it [indiscernible] This is what I said, those are calls that we keep taking. Forgot about with written asset classes -- among written classes. Written asset class duration could change. Depending on the view that we have on industry.

I think historically not...

If you look at our duration [indiscernible] back March 22, duration of 3.9, for March 23 duration went up to 5 plus. And Ask to come back to the market and explain every quarter mark-to-market. [indiscernible] all that the explanation of the market has because it's [indiscernible]

And does not go to [indiscernible]

Only mark-to-market on equity is going to change, but that's more a balance sheet number. Only for solvency, if it's a negative, it gets considered, if it's a positive, it gets ignored.

Great. So -- got it. And do you use EPS in equities.

Very selective. We have more individual stocks that is kind of largely...

I have seen some insurance company and even our debt --- partial very small...

Very small proportion. But generally, we believe in owning a very limited set of stocks and activity kind of manage those stock that we make up take a call.

When you see the claim indication moderating or normalizing?

Claim indication is here to exist. The question is for ability to players finance [indiscernible] Because, I mean [indiscernible] , I mean, motor [indiscernible] they will obviously kind of keep increasingly cost [indiscernible] . And the question is, are you able to negotiate and work with that garage person to, for example, the constant dilemma that we end up with, seeing in motor claims is, repair as a replacement. So for them, if we do a replacement, the relative billing is high as compared to the [indiscernible] . But we will obviously negotiate and work with that garage person to say that in this accident, which happened on a similar nature 3 years back, the repairs was at [indiscernible] put already through repairs to my [indiscernible] So that's definition that we have. Two, we are increasingly trying to divert traffic to a preferred provider of network [indiscernible]. So these are garages, which whom we have abandoned. And for the customer, we tell [indiscernible] should take vehicles to those before garages. Where we are able to give assurance on quality of repairs. And two, the average claim size in those garages waiting [indiscernible]. So you keep your inflation check.

[indiscernible] the commodity-related inflation would have slipped into the claim inflation.

Yes.

Do you think that it's coming under base. So...

But that's all related [indiscernible] numbers, right? So which is what we keep looking at. We keep looking at what has been the inflation trend, probably motor or on health. So in general, what we have seen is on motor a single-digit inflation for impacts. On health, it has generally been between a high single digit to early double-digit inflation.

That is continuing.

That's continuing.

And [indiscernible] level, you will see the top line is obviously a function of pricing and volume. Does volume level the you've seen a pickup [indiscernible] because of the technical factor.

If you ask me on the commercial line, there is a significant asset volumes. Because of the scale of activities that is getting played out. When you look at, for example, vehicles on the road, which is carrying goods in transit and so on. If you look at employees, employers hiring for various different sectors that's going down. When you see an increase in volumes on corporate health insurance, SMEs, which are smaller and mid corporates seeking an increase of product. There's an increase in volumes. So that's retail build [indiscernible]. Customers are opting for taking within insurance count. So clearly, there's an increase in volumes at a [indiscernible]. But on motor, 2-wheeler, we are not seeing any increase in volume because they're still not out of the goods. Private car and commercial vehicle seems to be doing reasonably well in terms of increased volumes. It's a mixed bag. It's only kind of it.

Just one question on the debt portfolio was 82%. Is the corporate bond mix still at 32%?

It changes between period to period. Right now I think the numbers about 45% corporates, we are at number 3. It's between corporate bonds [indiscernible]

I think a number around 18% put together.

Put together, but roughly I think if [indiscernible] title were about 40%, [indiscernible] about 40%, 45% on. I can't give the exact.

Okay. Got it so basically then this -- if there is a downward ratio that should...

It will be huge positive, which is exactly what we have benefited from the 2018 cycle. That's how we are positioned. The reason why we increased duration that we -- I mean during this period is exactly to capitalize the opportunity as and when the rate cycle sees a decline.

25% is corporate and [indiscernible] is 45%.

Yes.

Like this selection cases for the successor for [indiscernible] how does it...

Actively looks at the session, not just for our book. In general, as transition, there is always a conversation that happens it was [indiscernible]. Actively, there are at different levels, we look for the relative succession planning. And at appropriate time, we'll be the Board and the [indiscernible].

So like 3, 6 months before or like is there ...

At suitable time, obviously, it would definitely come back. As of now, as I said, proactively, they have been involving not just because it's a guideline. Actually, they have been involving in succession plan. And there is enough talent within [indiscernible] and within the group for any of this management transition.

Any pushbacks that you gave when you do overseas roadshows for FI calls...

So in general, I think they don't have so much on the Chennai's officials because they have seen us largely delivery to what we have kind of an [indiscernible]. In general, they are quite comfortable with. [indiscernible] asked is what you have been asking, which is new licenses in terms of how that would be around. This will add very much efficient, which is pretty much there. And then, of course, I see the bank stake [indiscernible]. Broadly, it's discussed. Otherwise, business fundamental others are going to guarantee more. So otherwise business fundamentals, I think people have largely [indiscernible]. The ask is why don't we push a pedal for board. So we always trying to take a balance between growth and net rate. Very easy for us to double market share in 6 months. When it comes significantly deteriorating underwriting, which we are not quite comfortable with this. So one can say why do you do that.

How is your guidelines are supposed to play out for the PSU space?

PSUs generally have been slightly better on the general overall expense management. So more than it's a positive -- positive change. But having said that for them, the relative cost of their employees are very high proportion. And every third, fourth year, there's always a base negotiation that [indiscernible] have been. And today impact, they not have been observed to hold cost of fleet. They do an amortization over I think 3 or 5 years [indiscernible] Therefore it's not ample to have comparison on what their actual excess of management is vis-a-vis the reported number. But having said that, in general, I think the [indiscernible]. The question for them is not more on here. The question for them is more on the discipline on underwriting that's so much a bigger challenge. That's has always been there. But increasingly the -- at least the sense that we get is the Finance Ministry is pushing them very hard on becoming more reasonable on underwriting. That's great news for us, which is why corporate health growth percentages that you see for [indiscernible] . It's much better. Because when -- even these they don't comply start talking to get reasonable on price or focus on underwriting. We get the type of accounts that we want to write at a price that we are comfortable.

So just an extension to that conversion, too, did you see a massive decline of PSU market shares, it's now, I think, about 35% if you included [indiscernible]. So -- and when you look at banks in general, I mean you're doing exercise in global [indiscernible] state-owned ownership in the system, that number is about 30%, 35%, 1/3. Basically, it says that INR 100 opportunity. 1/3 will always be anti-selection. So we focus on the 2/3 -- so in your view, I mean, what's the play from a GI perspective.

So it's all a function of how disciplined they stayed on underwriting. So far, you could see last -- for the last 4, 5 years, every year, they have been losing ground of anywhere between 3 to 5 percentage year-on-year consistently. The question is now with the Finance Ministry is putting a lot of ship to them. Say they get better on underwriting. We have to wait for the it. If they do that, it's a great, great positive. But then they will continue to lose market share -- in which case then they will continue to lose market share. For them, it's a very tight rope that they have to walk through. It's not going to be easy. And their management change happens as frequent as every 3 years. So again, you cannot run a strategy for, let's say, very long periods. It will not be easy.

One thing is also a huge [indiscernible]

So the replacement of that, it's going to be time consuming and expensive. Our sense they should continue to bleed in terms of market share whichever way you kind of look at it. So the advantages they do have some [indiscernible] management.

And then the other part is the smaller sort of -- relatively smaller set of companies that's up 3% market share.

[indiscernible] change of shadows. So the question is every 3 years, every 5 years, there's a new child who comes. Now we have to see what mindset on underwriting. You will see this player continuing to exist. I don't think anyone will really buy them out because you go to far out what is the objective of environment.

And just to complete the one other, is there sweet spot in your mind, maybe not next to be next 1, 2, 3 year. but just, let's say, in 10 years, like what's the sweet spot from a size like I think when we...

Home insurance is a very under traded market in India.

So I think market share-wise, so what is the category growth itself, but I think within the category, like today, Lombard is about 9%. We look at progressive some of the other global companies, U.K. broadly, the sweet spot remained between 12% to 18% in that zone. More than 20%, you sort of lose out, less than 20%...

For example, if you look at our aggregate market share and [indiscernible]. On commercial lines, we'll be already within that range. Up 12% to 18% in each of the segment and in some of the segment market leaders. But if you look at the rest of the categories, motor, for example, we will be slightly over at 10%, 11% growth. So that's because of the conscious call of us. Health, retail very, very low market share. There is enough kind of more headroom for us, which is why I said, one is, as [indiscernible] mentioned, the existing category itself. Two is, new category [indiscernible]. So it is a big opportunity. And I think it is a big opportunity. Home is big opportunity. Some of time box products that we were experiencing are big opportunities. Next 3, 5 years, helped that we [indiscernible] that's what referenced.

Since you mentioned OPD and think us the same thing in 3 years, they also wanted to be 5% of the book, will it make money.

This in the way we are positioning OPD is more on preventive one. And our hypothesis is, if you do that well, it can possibly result in reduced number of claims. It's like what we are doing on the commercial side. On the commercial lines, we put a lot of effort in managing risk of corporates because we didn't want to claim even then, it has worked. Same philosophy on OP. So OPD is doing good things to us. One, we want to exhibit more of preventive awareness. So therefore, that [indiscernible] creates an opportunity. Two the IL TakeCare app, which was thought of only as health only offering. We are seeing signs of -- early signs of cross-sell opportunity. Beyond this to motor other difficult retails, which is why last 3 earnings calls, people have been asking us what has been the cross-sell revenue that we're generating. That's doing well. Month-on-month, quarter-on-quarter, it's compounding with dividends, but small numbers. We don't -- it's not a very big number in the overall [indiscernible].

[indiscernible] break for 5 minutes. [Break]

Pricing on this health 360 product as products, which were launched it the bank last quarter. Where you had the sale premium from the age 21 and 60. There want to understand the thought process of the risk perspective as to what actually went into the [indiscernible].

So on the premium that constraint for all the years. [indiscernible] handwriting experience. It all explains whatever years that you're depend on testing.

Okay. but the entry -- at the entry point, it's the same premium regardless of age, right? Why from 21 to 65?

So I think you don't look at those specific uses of those products then basis, let's say, the overall portfolio outcome it's what we kind of design the price index. So each product line, each channel of distribution could possibly exhibit a different pricing requirement because we lost behavior could also be for, let's say, a given set of customers. So hence, to that extent is how pricing could be a [indiscernible] that. But eventually, when we will look at the overall experience it will be based on the overall portfolio experience for the health category as well, it will between [indiscernible] For example, on motors, the price that I will offer for this current sourcing at a dealership level. It could be very different on the price that I give for a collage that is [indiscernible], it could vary. Or if he ask of that to this [indiscernible] before we decide on whole [indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

Again, as I said, it could vary between segment to segment. But maybe in health, yes, for the given channel, it could be a particular basis on price. But for -- in a different segment, it could be something else.

[indiscernible] Why don't we have the confidential density has been quite[indiscernible] we have in sustainable for even those who are funded. We have seen interest rates also going up. So we [indiscernible] reflecting in numbers [indiscernible]

For that our thought was last 2 years for us, it's a conscious call for us to not necessarily go after segments wherever it is very higher competition. And this is not a percent that we are taking that approach. In general, we have always looked at how the market has responded. And on that basis is how we have been taking, let's say, any kind of changes to the interest mix that we brought on today. So it is in that context is where we have gone slow or cautious on writing motor. But the good news is, as we see now on an incremental versus directionally, we seem to see the industry getting far more reasonable, both in terms of pricing and maybe relatively, I would say, to some action on the cost of distribution. For example, if you look at the industry combined just for motor, our first half of last year was about 124%. Quarter 3 has combined came to 118%. So it seems to -- we don't have full year numbers for [indiscernible] for all players. Once it is out, obviously, we will come back. But the sense that we get is possibly things should be getting better. So that's how we -- at least so far as the current year is concerned, the way we are positioning ourselves is to grow in line with the market. So even in the last couple of years, when we lead core market share. It's not that we stop investing in distribution or we stop investing in creating claims capability or let's say, investing in technology to build efficiency in all those things. Although [indiscernible] as and when the tide comes over, we are rightly paced to kind of capture the opportunity. That's how we are [indiscernible]

What do you think to the indicator that kind of slowing?

So I say, one is the combined issue of the market. It's a good indicator to tell you that the market is starting to possibly reprice itself. Either on price or relative to the cost [indiscernible]. Two, some of the regulatory changes. For example, the new experience of management guidelines, has come through effective April 23. That put the cap of 30% multiline players.. And it's public information. Many players in the market are operating at a threshold, which is more than 30%. While there's a glide part of 3 years that is laid down by the regulator to bring down for the [aggression] less than 30. Honestly, every company will have to start demonstrating it right from year 1. Whatever action they would want to kind of get moderated it to, which is in itself an opportunity for us. So these are signs that we look for.

And look at the PO management, there are PSUs, which are way below 30%. So there could be an aggression from their side also.

So more motor in general has been very aggressive and competitive. The question is what risk that you select at a given cost. So many players have done that same mistake. A lot of players entered motor post-price deregulation in 2008. What happened. Many of the players have seen a significant adverse development on both combined and their solvency numbers. Of course, many of them get the tail duration or, let's say, the long-term [claim] development, particularly for Motor wrong. While it's a one year contract in terms of [let's say] policy [duration], leave us at the new long-term policies that are getting issued post September 2018. But in general, the policy duration is 1 year. But the claims cycle is much, much longer. They take aggressive bets in possibly writing as a segment to date for the benefit of losses or the, let's say, the impact of losses that will come through in the subsequent periods as kind of significantly impacted the [indiscernible] adversely and that's why you see they have not been able to make any meaningful dents in market share, but their combined/solvency have been aggressively impacted. And then this change on EOM is again a very, very positive development. Both players will get far more reasonable on the overall cost of doing business. And in general, look at keeping the overall cost [indiscernible]. It is very, very positive. So that's another development that we will kind of watch for. But again, in the short run, this could be slightly more competitive. First layers may try to look at other segments and see if there is any room available for some kind of a cross subsidy. But that could work provided. They are all operating at as better company. Most of them are on -- look at the industry government. [indiscernible] 118, many of them are operating in that threshold plus/minus a few percent [indiscernible] about. I think you have to also look at there, relatively for them, the cost of their normal operations is very high. And two, when they are accounting for some of those, their employee [retirement] cost, they don't account for the entire impact of it. They have some temporary dispensation by which they amortize the expenses over [indiscernible]. So it's not a like-to-like or an apple to apple comparison in terms of what the expense ratio sir. But having said that, they do have an elbow room for them to be able to kind of work on that business. Point is if they are willing to slightly increase the expense of management. They have the solvency to take care of it. Look at their combined ratios at which they are operating at, which is the point that I made. Had they been operating? Your point would have been absolutely correct. If they would have been operating at a combined which is far more reasonable. And then, let's say, the expense of management is well within the thesholds. For [indiscernible], we have historically operated at expense of management, which is within the limits. So hence, there is not so much of a challenge for us.

[indiscernible] the balance of [ 140% ] [indiscernible] how much will you grow.

And look at the solvency, realize the government is continuing to infuse capital in those [indiscernible], that's a different proposition. But at least what we see, I'm sure when you do your own channel checks. Clearly, the government has been significantly pushing these companies to get far more reasonable [indiscernible]. And that's exactly what we see as an [area of operation], slightly divesting from motor. This change in the purposes of, let's say, even the finance ministry in terms of direction to the state-owned government. If you look at recently, sometimes about last 9 to 12 months back, there was a CNG report on these companies in the [indiscernible]. That's mainly for almost for 4, 5 years, they went very aggressive on underwriting. In [indiscernible] process, the report captures possibly loss to the extent [indiscernible] INR 24,000 or 25,000 crores. Now today, we are talking of each of these offices to get reasonable underwriting. It's a great opportunity for acceleration [indiscernible].

[indiscernible]

Health is 1, across [indiscernible] they were very aggressive in general which is why -- I'm just saying across in general, we are very aggressive in writing the quote. On [indiscernible] they significantly kind of play. In other individuals, we've always been kind of writing it very aggressively. Commercial lines, some of these lines of businesses, they have been pricing it agressively. But unlike motor [indiscernible], which are smaller ticket exposures. Corporate lines can have a huge impact on [management].

[indiscernible].

[indiscernible] when you look at a business that is sourced [indsicernible]. The relative cost of acquisition of that segment is lower but it is high on exposure.

Right.

So the call for you to take this for a small amount of increased expense of management, would you also put your balance sheet to this. Or, would you want to put your earnings under check. That's a call that every [indiscernible] company has to take. [indiscernible] corporate lines, also comes with a relative lower cost of acquisition. Depending on your ability to go directly and work with these corporates. For [indiscernible] to go intermediately then obviously, they will slightly get more expensive. But if we have built a direct relationship of working with the corporates. Then there understand for understandable reasons, the cost of QM will be slightly lower. So hence, you will find in those situations, the expense of management given the threshold of 30% in reality not to be as much as what it is. So there again, the same call [indiscernible] lines are high on exposure. Again, that's a trade-off that you have to make. Do I pay either 1% or 2% more and put and take a risk exposure on my balance sheet, which is not worth of it. Those are calls that you have to take. Now all these calls you can take provided, you're running at a combine, which is far more efficient.

[indiscernible] liability typical corporate lines of business. So strategy on the market share the strategy, what I can understand now -- you see there is a lot of [indiscernible] that will be flowing in for the other competitors and which they are going to be slightly more cautious about their growth. And once it is all aligned with the market average, this is where [indiscernible] market or the market share will pick up after a couple of years. Is that the way I see?

And I can give you a couple of examples to exactly direct that business historical experience. But if you look at the same example, what I was giving on corporate health. Now for ICICI Lombard, we had an 11% market share till 2014, all the corporate segment. Between 2014 to 2018.

It was at group health, right?

Group health, corporate health, employer employee health, whichever [indiscernible] each of them you said in different term, but I'm just saying that insurances for employees given by their employer. So between 2014 to 2018, our market share drop happened from 11% to less than 5%. Exactly for the reason of price accretion being exhibited by, less than say 5%.

[indiscernible].

2014 to 2018, over a 4-year period. And we lost almost more than 50% market share. But post 2019, prices corrected because the industry could not continue within an unduly long period of time to continue to bleed in that segment. But it did not correct exactly to the same levels as what it was prior to 2014, but it did correct. The moment is corrected, we saw our market share increase from 5% to 6.5%. And that's how we are rightly positioned. So the moment that conversation moves away from price, it is more into service. Where we are able to exhibit a much better outcome in terms of market share.

And probably the regulation will also be kind of and getting the conversion [indiscernible], initial was a market process [indiscernible] there.

So it's a combination of both. It's a combination of both. Now even with the regulation is also kind of saying that you have to operate at a given threshold. In those times, there was no specific of course, there's an overall limit on expense of management from 2016 onwards. But I would say the driving force for each of them is to go very aggressive on price and which then starts to correct. Starts to correct after a point of time. So that's called [indiscernible] health or employee employer. The other example is fire. Fire line of business has been a very, very soft market for almost, I would say, 10 year period. From 2008 to 2018. 2019, when the reinsurers looked at their portfolio experience of what has been the primary company seeding into their portfolios. They realize that they were making losses.

So then with retail or the non retail?

It is corporate lines [indiscernible] because [indiscernible] predominantly, I would say corporate.

Taking from a fire because you also have some...

We do have hire, but that's -- I'm just saying that segment is relatively okay in terms of price. But I'm saying that relative to soft period of pricing for 10 years. Post 2018, the reinsurers said in case if you want to still continue to avail the insurance capacity, you have to price those risks at a given floor price. So immediately, the very next couple of years, the growth of fire insurance for the industry, which used to hover between 15% and 16%, saw a growth upwards of 30% plus. And we saw a growth of 35%, 40%. But again, the focus is more on service. So we are able to capitalize the market opportunity in that particular segment. So similarly, there are many such examples where at different points of time, markets have been very, very competitive/aggressive. The key is your ability to stay invested and be a bit cautious in growing the book. What we will be extremely mindful of is will be very, very [indiscernible] of losing in a distribution, particularly wherever it is retail banks. Because as we all know, losing a distribution and getting a reentry at [indiscernible] very expensive. That's something we are very, very careful about. We may moderate exposures in most of the retail lines where we are not comfortable with underwriting but we will never want to [vacate in] distribution.

Just sort of a question on the IFRS because that comes in, there will be a lot of release in profitability going forward?

So IFRS, one. So there are 2 [mission more] projects that the regulator is embarking among many other things. One is this is a transition to IFRS. And the second is also to move into risk-based capital regime. [indiscernible] Solvency 1 mechanism in terms of [indiscernible]. On IFRS and RBC, both of them are likely to transition around the same time. Hopefully, over the next 3, 4 years, the kind of horizon. They have [indiscernible] not put a firm date by when they want to see this happening. But most likely, it looks like over the next 3, 4 years. 3, 4 big changes, which will happen consequent to IFRS. One is we will have to obviously come back to the market every quarter and explain mark-to-market movement on [indiscernible], so which because of which our aggression philosophy will not change. We will be more than happy to come and explain the month to market, so that's one change that you would see. The second couple of changes are more on underwriting, which is you will be allowed to do deferred acquisition costs today costs are all expensed [indiscernible]. Now there, the question is what proportion of your policies are long term? How much impact will it have on -- even for deferral of cost for single-year policies. And what is the kind of growth rates that you are expecting on the overall portfolio outcome? So the extent of impact of that will be a function of all these 3 factors.

This is single [indiscernible] it's like over a period of the entire [indiscernible].

[indiscernible], for example, I write a risk on first of March. It's a 12-month risk. Today, I want to explain everything over a 12-month difference but if there are long-term policy. In which case then it can like, let's say, your example, home fire. So we do insured homes, which is typically, let's say, a 10 or 15-year risk. In which case it could get amortized over a 10- or 15-year period. So which is why I said it's a function of growth, a function of what kind of long-term policies that you have and also the proportion of let's say, relatively even money or at what point of time are you kind of making those risks. So that's the second impact on deferred acquisition costs. [indiscernible] of the bigger impact for multiline players will be more the discounting of business. So today, on claim reserves or, let's say, a liability that is likely to get settled, let's say, 5 or 6 years from now for example, in motor third-party. We carry those reserves on a nominal basis. We don't discount those results to present value.

Which means for the next 3 years you apply some counting factor. So you will apply it on an [indiscernible].

You will apply risk free date and maybe to discount the reserves that you are getting on a nominal basis. So automatically, your reserves will look lower. Now there, the impact will be better for companies like us because we build a claim inflation assumption of 12%, 13% on our reserves. While there is no complete disclosure on what the market numbers are, but the market [heresay] seems to suggest a single-digit inflation assumption that many players in the market carry. So therefore, as when this transition happens, you could possibly see a bigger impact for players like us or companies which are reasonably and sufficiently reserved. So that's the change that you will see coming.

I was under impression, [indiscernible] between [indiscernible] 30 [indiscernible].

So what you should do is something which we have been talking through for the last 6 years is the disclosure of reserving development trends. And basically, the resume trial disclosure tells you for 10 financial periods. What has been your loss ratio estimations in the very first year of underwriting the risk. And over the next, let's say, 10 years or whatever years of cycle of development, whether how robust or adverse has the loss development been for each of those periods. At least for us, you will see 9 out of 10 years positive reserve [indiscernible]. And we have been talking about to make it mandatory for every player in the market whether listed or otherwise. Effective March 22, which is 1 year back, regulator has now made it mandatory for every company to put on their website, whether listed or otherwise, they're reserving triangle disclosures. If you see the development of the triangle over periods. Now that will give you an answer as to how good or bad the company has been in terms of their reservation.

I think so to me [indiscernible] fiction about how conservative you were initially.

But you have to watch it over period. We can easily show a release of reserves in 1 year. But the question is what happens the year thereafter. If the year thereafter, you again increase reserves, that to my mind is doesn't reflect conservatism. So you have to watch the reserving triangles over cycles particularly for lines of businesses, which exhibit a long tail of development [indiscernible]. Shorter sales of businesses, which is okay, 2 to 3 years is fine. But lines have been long in claims watch it over cycles.

[indiscernible] taken our pricing [indiscernible] to find [indiscernible].

[indiscernible] it's a combination of both. Some element of price increases there are other players in the market as have also fallen. And two, they are also getting more reasonable of their overall cost of [indiscernible] cost of distribution, combination. You can sustain that. And that's the reason why we are saying. Even that the market seems to be getting reasonable, particularly in the context of motor, unlike the last 2 years where you have generally seen a drop in market share for whatever reason. This year, we hope to kind of grow in line with the market. That's the expectation that we have.

[indiscernible].

So last year, they notified the pricing in June right? So though it was expected to be done in the beginning of the year. But of course there was [indiscernible] dialogue, which was happening last year. As of now, no indication. But that's a good point because we will per se any which will inflate our [indiscernible] because of the claim inflation that gets kind of get built in every year as it passes. So that would mean automatically [indiscernible]. So now for us, we need to make sure that we do the risk selection properly, on the segment that we would want to [indiscernible] under it. So as of now, no more changes in the [indiscernible]. The only other positive to that is the third-party rules that got notified effective [indiscernible] April 22. So as of now, again, we have not made any benefit resulting from the 6-month timing [indiscernible]. But if that comes to maybe we may not even see a price change on motor [indiscernible]. But again, if I take the adverse side to it, in general, the core compensations are going up. [indiscernible] look at a pedestrian on the street, and they say that beyond, let's say, formula-based composition. We do give a off amount towards various factors. That's undergoing a change. So in general, they have been more generous in compensating the victims of [indiscernible] So we're seeing [indiscernible] inflation. So we do kind of pitch with the regulator and the government, these are driving forces behind [indiscernible]. You have to wait and see how that as of now no indication of the price change.

[indiscernible] motor price, motor only pricing environment remains broadly where it is right now [indiscernible].

Let's say we expect to maintain market share in all [indiscernible].

The commercial line, so there's been a lot of noise there, it's a one inside [ IRTA ] [indiscernible] price execution on the other hand, obviously, reinsurance has gone up. So net debt, how is that [indiscernible] on your...

Early days, only thing is, obviously, we will come back and give you better insights in July when we have our first quarter numbers. But typically, first April and first January are the 2 dates when most of the corporates renew their insurance [indiscernible] through the year, but predominantly, I would say, first [indiscernible]. As of now, the early indications are a single-digit price reduction in particularly for the fire line of business, exactly for the couple of points that you mentioned. But we will watch for the development. But our sense is while I give this more from a market perspective, but the impacts of these changes could be different for different players. For example, on the rate hardening, even in the earnings call, which we said on an average on the [indiscernible] production, the rates have gone up between 40% to 60%. That impact will be different for different shares because their overall portfolio experience could be very, very different. And therefore, they could have got impacted by a price increase, which is higher than the range of 42. True in many instances, some of these renewal terms would have come with the conditions or riders, which are more adverse for those players. For example, there could be institution of the loss corridor in the regional contract, which would mean to say that for a given loss range, the loss experience will have to be [borne] by the primary [indiscernible]. The reinsurance will not make [indiscernible]. Those are traditional riders, which could have come in the event if the price is slightly lower. So we were not comfortable with any of those criterias. So in so far our terms of reinsurance are concerned, I think in general, we have been able to kind of stitch a better commission terms relative to the market. And the overall cost has been, we believe, lower than what the market impact is.

The cost increase would be only on the [indiscernible] side.

Only other catastrophic proportion. That's it.

Commission side, how much impact will you have seen like in general?

[indiscernible] Reinsurance in general because we have been exhibiting a [indiscernible] outcome to the reinsurers. We have not necessarily seen any kind of drop in the commission.

The others [indiscernible].

Others depending on what loss experience they're exiting. But on the fact that they operate they are operating at a combined which is higher. The expectation is that they would also operated a reinsurance portfolio also with the adverse outcome. Which means that commission rates would have got moderated.

That could be applicable to the PSU insurers as hedge.

For everyone. So for everyone.

[indiscernible]

But [indiscernible], if you look at, they will not get -- in that there's not been a favorable treatment. What is there to look for is the proportion of reinsurance that different players does. That would again be different ports. So look, if you look at the state-owned companies, they do retain a majority of the risk on the net. So maybe they are taking some balance sheet costs. [indiscernible]. But no deferential expense for any of the players.

Are we still looking or expecting any pressure coming from reinsurers in terms of price?

I think the at least so far as the at least the renewals are concerned, it's pretty much [stabilized]. Having said that, every year, we're on the block. We have to kind of negotiate reinsurance terms at the beginning of each year. So and again, like primary insurances, even reinsurance goes through cycles. And you tend to see some periods of hardening and as losses tend to stabilize.

Was last couple of years were pretty severe.

As I said [indiscernible]. So increasingly, we are seeing a lot, many catastrophic events. So impacting, let's say, generally, the economy at large. So therefore, unless and untill you have not priced in properly, you can get impacted [indiscernible] well. So that is one impact. The second and the most important element for primary companies like us is adequacy of catastrophic reinsurance protection. Many companies may buy a limit of catastrophic loss protection up to a particular threshold. But that's a compromise that they do between risk and reward. In the sense, some may say that I'm not willing to pay so much of cost for a higher limit. Let me compromise on cost, but I will possibly go with a lower limit on catastrophic losses, which can actually back fire. And many a times, for example during slightly, we don't have any event of a similar magnitude as we speak, when Mumbai floods happened several years back. Many insurance companies on the direct side had to kind of dip into the net account because of the limits of catastrophic losses that was put as a condition. But for ICICI Lombard, the extent of limit that we had bought, we consumed about 10% of the limit that we [had buy]. So we were absolutely okay. But many companies had to dip in beyond their limit into the [network], which is terrible. Again, you're putting a balance sheet risk to your [indiscernible]. So those are things that we would engage. If you're lucky, you could be okay but in case if it is an adverse event that has happened in any given period, it can significantly blow up your balance sheet, forget about earnings volatility. That's something we are very, very mindful of even will be [indiscernible] in question.

More about -- we've been investing now simply to build out the [indiscernible] coming obviously because of transition model, the next stage of growth that everyone [indiscernible] -- so how has that played out for you?

So as far as your retail health is concerned, we had announced the [indiscernible] of extension of portfolio. So as far as we are concerned, I think the real has been good for us on this particular portfolio. And quarter-on-quarter, we have seen business growth very sharply. So first quarter last year, we grew lower in the industry, our second quarter all at [indiscernible] industry in third quarter and fourth quarter. We have a significant to the [indiscernible]. [indiscernible] Our objective is very clear. If you look kind of over market 2%, retail has 2.9%, clearly of growth. And [indiscernible] deposit we were slow starts are not having invested into this particular aspect of business. We believe we have the necessary tools [indiscernible] to kind of ramp up the business even when we -- even before we know committing investments, we have always been no using [indiscernible] to figure out how customers perceive us. And the voice of customers [indiscernible] always represented that Lombard is a trusted [indiscernible] across segments. As for our leadership position on motor commercialize was not -- was kind of extended to the [indiscernible] as well. Now this year gone by. And having maintained or gathered momentum, our objective obviously would be to continue focusing to ramp up this particular market. So as far as competition is concerned, every business semi-segment has its own competitive intensity. It's for us to figure out what our unique proposition and over a period of time, I think what we have done is try to decommoditize the proposition. We don't want to be the cheapest. We have always looked at building services propositions. We said beyond just being the simplest in the market. Focusing on claim services. So even, for example, an [indiscernible]. Very proud to say that as a company, we were at forefront of settling the claims at a very fast pace. And before that, we [indiscernible] behavior or in [indiscernible] from some other company. And so as far as year concerned, we are focused on building a distribution and giving a very high-quality [indiscernible] experience our customers. In addition to that, you would have heard us talk about [indiscernible], that's a proportion that I spoke about. In terms of how do you engage with the customers, give them -- look at the [indiscernible] as a mechanism, how do you use the same platform to cross sell [indiscernible] point of contract for the customer. So I think last few years a few quarters have been very, very encouraging for us, not only in terms of the number of downloads in terms of how the platform is shaping up from just being a health proposition to do a more broad-based thing and I think even [indiscernible] to offer OPD as a product offering a close [indiscernible] services where starts from teleconsultation to getting diagnostics or even getting the medicines delivered. I think that all that is working well for us. And obviously, that is one area that we would want to continue to invest and a quarter-on-quarter number are encouraging from every [indiscernible],and that is going to be.

This proposition would be what exactly in terms of [indiscernible], but it's a bit -- what is it that acting? Or are you paying on the payout to the agenda, you're seeing there OP service the customer meter, you have a better experience or it will be higher [indiscernible].

As I mentioned earlier on. It's not at [indiscernible] -- So either developing health agency business. It's more like. We are a newcomer to the market there [indiscernible]. So people understand, so people -- so even though when you look at motor business while leadership oriented it is always related. It's not that we never had agencies have pretty large company. And from a mix perspective, agency business would look small. But if you compare like in isolation, we have access to agents and have been working with them. So as far as our proposition is concerned is so when we work with any agent. The biggest advantage that tenants will us is obviously our brand are very established proposition. As far as claims servicing is concerned, as I mentioned, what is very important to an agent or any [indiscernible] for that. It was for the customer is how quickly and how far the company is to paying cash, so these are the things that we kind of talk about, and that is in a guide [indiscernible].

There's been private equity money coming towards a [indiscernible]. That's about getting aggressive on the group side. So have you experienced any sort of price competitiveness on the group segment or?

So on the [indiscernible], I think group health has been a positive surprise for us. So for example, it should take you back to the past. And as [ Gopal ] have mentioned. So as a company have always focused on both growth and profitability. And CHI was 1 segment after [ Darin ] 2013,'14 was [indiscernible] very highly competitive intentsity with [indiscernible]. And because of [indiscernible] against an 11% market share, and we had to reduce our market share to half of that. But because we -- but again, as has been our philosophy, we were not exiting our distributions. So we were still working with the corporate customers and our [indiscernible] abilities to get the more profitable segment of businesses from them. I not have a larger share of the business had us go to that to that phase. You would have seen the media report in terms of the [indiscernible] report on the PSUs are where closet INR 25,000 crores is a loss that they have a pause on [ HI ] business. That has resulted into these companies [indiscernible] of philosophy. What was that essentially happening is that if you look at [indiscernible] lost market share. And GHI was still one business where the holding market share because they were [indiscernible] between the private sector public of our PPA and getting the price of our PSU. And now as they started increasing the prices, obviously, we were present in the market, we've always quoting for those businesses. It was at that time between us and the PSU was [indiscernible] 25%. So the moment that gap kind of reduced that businesses started shifting to us. As for when COVID had happended, we had also mentioned about effective affecting some bit of price increase we told 10% to 15% of rate increase. In fact, we were able to get a higher yield than what we had anticipated, and we were able to retain all. Most of our customers. And that kind of post COVID, I think -- and that is how this change happened, and we have been able to get a very strong growth on the important on business as last. As we even look at the current year. I think that type [indiscernible] going through. So one of the advantages that we have over [indiscernible] is that [indiscernible] corporate customer. It's a multiproduct proposition. So it's fire health [indiscernible]. So the point is that if you;re only stand-alone. Then it's experience but there is nothing that you is virtually certain in terms of [indiscernible] payout. And so to that extent, I think we are in a good space as far as this business is concerned. And hopefully, that should continue. But for us, again, as I mentioned earlier, and pricing and profitability metric [indiscernible].

One thing I just added, I think we also have to be mindful of the earlier point that we discussed. I mean given that relatively employee employer corporate comes with the lower expense of management. So hence, to that extent, we'll have to see how that gets played out in the market. It'll also be a determining factor. And the second is, last 2, 3 years, at what [indiscernible] mentioned, the price increase has been reasonable. So whether every year, we you get a similar kind of a price increase at the time of value, again, something that we'll have to watch on cost.

Obviously, the orders an element in this business, so what are the sort of issues do you take to control that? How much could you [indiscernible] over there?

We are at the forefront of [indiscernible]. In fact, way back in 2004,2005 we were first company to have formally constituted in a separate function within our company, [indiscernible], which has taken a very formidable shape over a period of time. Not only we have a very strong in-housing, we also have a very wide network of external people [indiscernible] who work for us. We have developed [indiscernible] across segments. Also, for example, there are certain segments for which [indiscernible]. So something [indiscernible] a third party on Motor. Similarly, there are certain segments where the bases using technology and using AI [indiscernible] and identified basis, which whenever claim this kind of [indiscernible] though that [indiscernible] same set of algorithms and depending upon that [indiscernible]. Retail health is obviously one such area there is a lot of potency to have [indiscernible] and now we have multiple factors so it's [indiscernible] hospitals, channels, multiple criterias are there, which the team constantly looks at. And we believe that, that is one very important capability that we have developed and across product segments. So even on [indiscernible] lines, we have higher [indiscernible]. For example, is a fire within. So you look at our balance sheet the performance and if it is a Sunday night a [indiscernible] loss using mechanisms. These are identifiers and then we go and to compete investigation, and we are have been able to save a significant amount of money now because of that. Having said that, our objective is not to pay. Not to deny a claim, which is just [indiscernible] the [indiscernible], how much of that eventually is mitigated by the customer and out of which, how much do we win. And this is the end-to-end life cycle that we track as a company. And we have a very, very high [indiscernible].

[indiscernible] percentage of that [indiscernible] would be that as a [indiscernible].

We have combined a [indiscernible] loss ratio portion of on the results on top line given that we are making some investments for which the revenues have not yet been realized. Let's say [indiscernible] that will contribute to my incremental top line for which the costs are kind of largely absorbed hence that will [indiscernible] efficiency in operation. We will look at every single element of claims costs and see whether we can build efficiency managing the overall cost of claims, turning [ INR 10, 000 ] crore [indiscernible] a ton management [indiscernible] or other aspects you're working on, how we can possibly minimize the overall cost of claims, whether it is motor or whether it is [indiscernible]. And even on the commercial lines, we're looking at how we can continue to exhibit in [indiscernible]. In general, keep the overall cost of claims under [indiscernible], which also would result to the exchange better loss or [indiscernible]. Third is in general economies of scale [indiscernible] will be larger in sites. And obviously, [indiscernible] similar section. The section will logically translate into better efficiency in terms of overall expense ratios are concerned. So compare you want to see. What will lead to implemented on.

[indiscernible]

It takes time and it not at 2% like 1 year over year time. So raising prices exactly or [indiscernible] of course, which is when I said inflating revenues will be a function of multiple aspects. Is one of the investments that we have made and therefore, corresponding to incremental growth at the rate, which can be [indiscernible] volume drivers or it could be accretion in March.

But we see in that is [indiscernible]

Nothing so far. But fundamentally, our philosophy of providing for losses is at the point of renting the risk we provide. And only if there is a subsequent change in the loss experience is maybe better to actualize it as in when the seas outcome is low. But we -- whatever exposure that we are taking to recollect, we have been talking to [indiscernible] as we take exposures based on particular loss ratios within which [indiscernible] operated, which is the [indiscernible]. The maximum debt will be impacted with is 10%, to the extent of what you restate. So generally, we will retain between 25% to 30% of that business. So that's the maximum that you get impacted by it. So hence, we're operating within a given threshold. What we know would be the eventual loss in the event if the loss should be more than [indiscernible]. But as of now, nothing that we have kind of seen, which kind of worries us in terms of the loss, but we don't see the season play.

Also, there has been some controls the air has improved. So are we actually looking at it to grow it a bit more faster? Something thought or social [indiscernible] within that 5% of the overall side.

Now these are portfolios again, and kind of... this year there is a prediction of it being [a year ending]. Therefore, we really do not know how and offices are already experiencing it. The extent of humility [indiscernible] that you see in the vendor. There's clear signs of climate change. And therefore, we don't know how it would kind of play out. We will be slightly careful about growing that book. As of now, the thinking is within whatever boundaries that we have laid out, less than 5% of the annual revenue [indiscernible]. And that does not mean that we will necessarily go up to those levels. Again, within that is what you [indiscernible].

So on this [indiscernible] items that [indiscernible], obviously, I think [indiscernible] players [indiscernible] 3 segments were [indiscernible].

So honestly, there's been wait for the guidance [indiscernible] out what is [indiscernible] then we will take a call corresponding deal. As of now, in markets wherever composites have worked, it's been largely kind of resented into some efficiency/synergies in the overall cost. For example, if there's a common brand that has got both a live/insurance arm. And in which case, when you have a composite [indiscernible], let's say, efficiencies in the overall cost, particularly to export [indiscernible] Otherwise, the capital requirement, the way you account for it, all of them are completely independent. They are [indiscernible] I would say business centers less profitable. It doesn't change -- it's just that you get 1 common brand, maybe even the benefit of some [indiscernible] cost [indiscernible] otherwise no significant.

So the promoter stake, so we have [indiscernible] September and expect now that we've taken a couple of your [indiscernible] and what the permission [indiscernible] does that technical sale to us that is?

The bankers get all options open. So therefore, they at an appropriate point of time come back. As of now, we have not had any specific conversation on.

On the [technical parameters].

So the Banking Regulation Act stipulates [ 10 million ] or more than which is not hedged. All options for the bank is at out. Currently, we have not had any specific dialogue on how do you want to look at bringing down that exposure or, let's say, increasing that exposure.

I think an investment of the console ships obviously our reserve come down round. So at against would be over?

So you have to look at both not to say that we consciously realize change every year, but because sales structure costs between years. But in general, as rates improve, obviously, protection the mark-to-market on the book, which is what we have seen those numbers for 31st of March. But that's how we have kind of branch even in the past. I think we've obviously taken advantage of higher interest rate cycles. And as the cycle kind of turn around, I think our ability to retention or rebalance the portfolio is carpool be is. And maybe at that point of time, the ability for us to generate, let's say, higher levels of gains and quite positive. So the duration of the book, as we speak, is currently more than prior years, unlike [indiscernible] end of March [indiscernible]. And the book part in the regulator does not [indiscernible]. It's a very, very positive development on [indiscernible], otherwise, as I keep saying every quarter, we'll have to come back and explain to all of you why these numbers have moved because of market volatility.

Then how does[indiscernible] over the next couple of [indiscernible].

So if you like what we have been saying is we said the ROEs will be in the rate of 16% to 18%, which is what our current numbers indicate. As the ROE profile improves the combined profile improves from [indiscernible] In all panels, the ROE should kind of see an improvement as well with let's say, 18% to 20% range. But having said that, we also have to see how different segments of the business exhibit growth. For example, if motor continues to be slightly residue to the market and health continues to be [indiscernible] there have been an impact on the ROE. So there are still lots of variables that are [indiscernible]. It won't compare very fast. Then in those periods ROE will be impacted because the cost will come and [indiscernible]. So again, there are lots variable/moving factors to the ROE numbers. But on an average, our sense is we should be kind of operating within the days that we have spoken.

[indiscernible] 15% growth and 15% to 18% ROE something that is going to be.

So directionally, we'll obviously want to see better than that but that's a reasonable [indiscernible]. The market growth could be slightly better. It should be the range of 15% to 20% is what we believe. You will see other market interest. And as we have been saying, we are rightly positioned to capitalize on [indiscernible]. [indiscernible] Some of the channels, which are operating at the [indiscernible], [indiscernible] co-owners to the platform. You all have a small stake in impact. For instance, it is in our own interest to kind of make a succeed. The question is, how does it -- how will it play out. I mean, obviously, they are talking about getting customers, service providers, intermediaries and insurance companies, all of them on the same platform. Directionally, it's a great positive development. We'll have seen the platform coming into shape and to [indiscernible], it will eventually be an underwriting call in terms of which how do you want to kind of price for and how do you want to kind of [indiscernible]. But if you ask us, directionally, it's a great positive development maybe a slight drag on some of the other platform.

So on the PSUs and when the average price top 10 by the shareholders.

Pretty much every company has got a stage in [indiscernible]. At least on the digital side, there's no [indiscernible] to kind of look at it because as we keep saying, we will never want to lend our back to a franchise which purely compares on prices. And two, I mean, the platform does what they are doing, which is correct, which is we will obviously want to maximize their revenues. In which they will look for conscious churn of companies, which again does not work, which is why we chose to rather invest those amounts into our own registrar backlog [indiscernible]. And again, every quarter, we put out the numbers. There's 2 drivers, both in terms of recovering in volume of fees as well as exit value-driven [indiscernible].

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible] Thank you.