Good day, everyone. Welcome to Selective Insurance Group’s Third Quarter 2018 Earnings Call. At this time for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Treasurer, Rohan Pai.

Thank you, and good morning. This call is being simulcast on our website, and the replay will be available through November 26, 2018. A supplemental investor package, which includes GAAP reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures referenced on this call, is available on the Investors page of our website, www.selective.com. Certain GAAP financial measures stated in today’s call are also included in our previously filed Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Form 10-Q reports. To analyze trends in our operations, we use non-GAAP operating income, which is net income excluding the after-tax impact of net realized gains or losses on investments and unrealized gains or losses on equity securities. We believe that providing this non-GAAP measure makes it easier for investors to evaluate our insurance business. As a reminder, some of the statements and projections made during this call are forward-looking statements, as defined by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks and uncertainties. We refer you to Selective’s Annual Report on Form 10-K and any subsequent Form 10-Qs filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for a detailed discussion of these risks and uncertainties. Please note that Selective undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. On today’s call are the following members of Selective’s executive management team: Greg Murphy, Chief Executive Officer; John Marchioni, President and Chief Operating Officer; and Mark Wilcox, Chief Financial Officer. And with that, I’ll turn the call over to Greg.

Thank you, Rohan, and good morning. I’ll make some first introductory remarks and focus on some high-level themes for the quarter, as well as those they continue to drive our strategy for profitable growth. Mark then will discuss our financial results and John will review our insurance operations in more detail, providing additional color on key underwriting initiatives. We generated excellent results in the third quarter, as each of our underwriting segments contributed to strong profitability. Our overall GAAP combined ratio of 94.6% generated 6.1 points of return on equity, or ROE. Our Investment department had a spectacular quarter of net investment income after-tax, up 45% to $43 million, which had 10 points of ROE. Our third quarter results were particularly impressive in the context of elevating catastrophe losses, highlighting the strength of our underlying business. For the quarter, our annualized non-GAAP operating ROE was 13.8%, about 200 basis points above our target of 12%. We established a high bar by targeting our return on equity at 300 over our weighted average cost of capital. For the quarter, consolidated net premium written growth was robust 8%, driven by renewal pure pricing momentum and strong retention rates. For the third quarter, the underlying combined ratio or after adjusting for catastrophe losses and prior year casualty reserve development was 92%. For the nine months of the year, we reported a consolidated combined ratio of 95.8%. Our investment results reflect one, an effective tax rate of 18%, down 8.6 points from 2017; two, alternatives investments added $6 million after-tax; and three, tactical moves we’ve been making to optimize after-tax investment income on a risk-adjusted basis. Our investment portfolio is conservatively managed from a credit and duration standpoint at $3.37 of investments per dollar of stockholders equity, generating a 10% return on equity. This…

Thank you, Greg, and good morning. For the quarter, we reported fully diluted earnings per share of $0.93 and non-GAAP operating earnings per share of $0.99. The annualized ROE was 12.9% and the annualized non-GAAP operating ROE was at very strong 13.8%. As a result of our solid financial results over the past two quarter, our estimated annualized non-GAAP operating ROE has improved to 11.3%. Although a strong result on a year-to-date basis, particularly in light of the property losses we incurred in the first quarter and a major hurricane and our footprints in the third quarter, it is below our target of 12% for 2018. Consolidated net premiums written increased 8% in the third quarter, driven by 6% growth in our Standard Commercial Lines segment, 4% growth in Personal Lines and 27% growth for the E&S segment. The growth in Standard Lines was driven by continued strong pure renewal price increase and high retention rates. New business was down on a comparative quarter basis. Growth in the E&S segment was the result of the new producer relationship that incepted during the quarter. The consolidated combined ratio was a solid 94.6% in the third quarter. On an underlying basis or adjusting for the catastrophe losses of prior year casualty reserve development, our combined ratio was 92%, mostly in line with the year-ago level. For the first nine months of the year, our consolidated combined ratio was 95.8% and the underlying combined ratio was 93.1%. Our ex-CAT combined ratio was 90% for the quarter and 91.8% year-to-date. For the quarter, catastrophe losses added 4.6 percentage points for the combined ratio. Losses from Hurricane Florence accounted for $15 million on a pre-tax basis, or 2.4 combined ratio points. As a result of our participation [and theme in] [ph] National Flood Insurance Program,…

Thanks, Mark, and good morning. I’ll begin with an overview of some of our strategic initiatives and then discuss the results of our insurance operations by segment. In particular, we’re focused on our geographic expansion plans and initiatives leveraging technology to enhance the overall customer experience. These are key areas that will drive our ability to generate sustained outperformance in the years to come. Our long-term Commercial Lines targets are to build distribution partner relationships, representing 25% of the markets and seek a 12% share of wallet in each agency. This translates to a goal of a 3% market share in Commercial Lines, or an additional premium opportunity in excess of $2 billion in our existing footprint. So far this year, we have appointed 90 new distribution partners, including our newly opened states of New Mexico and Utah, bringing the total to over 1,300 and approximately 2,200 store fronts. We’ve been successfully executing on our geographic expansion plans, which have been outlined in recent quarters. We’ve established a strong presence in the Southwest with the opening of Utah and New Mexico for Commercial Lines earlier this month, complementing the recent expansion in Arizona and Colorado. We maintained our franchise distribution strategy in these states, opening Arizona with 18 partners, Colorado with 10, Utah with eight, and New Mexico with six. We’re also moving forward with our plans to open Arizona and Utah for Personal Lines in the fourth quarter of this year. Our early results are strong and we’re pleased with the quality of new business opportunities being presented. We continue to invest in technologies that help us enhance the overall customer experience with a goal towards increasing retention rates over time. We strive to deliver a superior omni-channel experience, enabling our customers to interact with us in a 27/7…

Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Christopher Campbell from KBW. Sir, your line open.

Hi, good morning, gentlemen.

Good morning.

I guess, the first question is just kind of on pricing in Commercial Lines, so you got like 370 bps, which was up 20 bps. Whereas if I’m looking across kind of larger competitors you guys would compete with in that small commercial space, one was kind of flat quarter-over-quarter and then another one was down 130 bps. I guess, just qualitative, why are thinking rate is better than competitors when we’re looking across there? and what are you guys doing differently? And are you seeing a trend for kind of these larger kind of national carriers? So are they resisting rate increases for retention? I guess, what’s the competitive dynamics you guys are seeing?

Chris, thank you. This is John. First of all, I appreciate the question, and I’ll explain our perspective on why we think we’re able to continue to performance extremely well relative to that balance between rate and retention and then we can get into a conversation about the competitive environment. But I can’t really speak with confidence in terms of how other companies view that balance between rate and retention. From our perspective, we’ve now established a very long track record dating back to 2009 in terms of managing to our overall rate targets and our rate targets relative to how we think about the expected claim inflation or claims trends. We’ve really attributed to two factors that have been very consistent for us. Number one is, we think that we have a high degree of sophistication in terms of the underwriting and pricing models that we utilized in a manner in which we delivered to our underwriters on the newer renewal business at a point of an individual transaction very specific pricing guidance relative to the expected profitability on the bucket of business that, that account has placed into. So very granular approach, and we’ve been doing that now with modeling since the 2005 kind of timeframe. So very mature on that perspective, it continue to enhance those capabilities. But I would say, the second part of this, and I think this is what really makes our approach unique is that, we’re delivering this in a model that’s supported by a high relationship high franchise value sort of distribution partners. And I know a lot of companies will talk about having that. I think, if you’re looking for evidence of whether or not it’s real, you’d have to look at retention rates relative to pricing. So our ability to…

And Christopher, this is Greg. Let me just add a little bit to that in terms of and please don’t be fooled by companies changing the definition of renewal pure price. Exposure is exposure, payroll is an exposure and can’t analyze your overall loss trends against the pricing number now that has all kinds of takeouts in it. We’re an industry that’s been classic on playing takeout. But when it comes to performance, the biggest measurement of – well, how are you going to performer next year is renewal pure price up against the expected loss inflation or claim inflation, which I’d say, we’re going through our budget process now. We’re probably going to see that number elevate just based on what we select for frequency and in commercial auto. But you’ve always heard me say, hope is not a strategy and arithmetic has no mercy. And in the case of 2019, it’s already done. 2019 is already finished, because what you’re going to earn rate-wise is already on the – is already in your inventory. So, as John mentioned, and you’ve heard this through Mark’s comments, we’re very close to that renewal price at four. And that’s kind of where, my belief is, you’re going to see claim inflation. So when you think about performance year-on-year 2019 to 2018, it’s going to be what are you doing in underwriting and claim improvement? And then how is your rate – earned rate going to match up against your expect trend. So don’t be fooled. I know you guys are focused on that, and that’s how we manage our organization. Let’s also remember that, when you look at 2019 to 2018, we’re in a good position on all our lines. Are we unsatisfied with our commercial auto results? Yes. But I’ll tell you that things that we’re seeing on comp in terms of what’s being thrown out on the street in terms of credits, in terms of higher commissions, in terms of – this is the longest tail with the longest medical inflation on it that, that the price levels that this is being thrown out at is getting to the point of disturbing.

Got it. That’s very helpful. So just – I guess, digging in a little bit on workers’ comp. So I think, John, you had mentioned, like maybe like 10 bps of positive rate. You guys are trying to manage that to like in a black, I guess, just as pricings coming in. I guess, just what are you guys seeing in terms of like your loss cost trends now? I mean, you’ve had some competitors that have talked about higher frequency. You guys are getting lower severity and really think about $20 million of reserves. I guess, just how should we think about like how are you feeling about the workers’ comp book overall? And then…

So – yes, Chris, this is John. I’ll start. I guess, we clearly have seen continued improvement in reserve development, which would suggest that for both frequency and severity basis, our actual reserve development has continued to run better than expected. And that has been the trend for a number of years, but we also recognize that trend can’t go down forever. And this is, in many cases, similar to where commercial auto was five to 10 years ago and ultimately, the trend did soft and ultimately reversed itself. Without getting into too much specifics around actual frequencies from an overall perspective less so in terms of versus expected, I think, you are starting to see a little bit of a slowing of the downward trend in frequency. And I would describe an environment of more of a leveling off for us at this point from a workers’ comp perspective.

[indiscernible] I would focus more on the underlying commodity ratio then I would have reported. And when you look at our underlying at 90 – call it, in the mid-96 range in our accident year and our internal targets that we sit there, which are risk-adjusted. Those are all fairly tied in the mid-90 range. And so what you’re seeing pushing this around a little bit is very long-term expected inflation rates versus actually what we’re settling out some of the inventory now, some of the inventories being pushed around. As John stated, frequency can’t go to zero, right? I mean, it’s not going to go to zero. And the question is, no different than, are your actuary who is trying to figure out when does the claim trend in commercial auto impacts that start to level out or actually diminish. They’re also looking at the comp line in terms of when does that lack now to that side. So both of those trends can’t go monotonically higher forever. So I just think, I would keep that in line, keep focus about where we are more on underlying, and I would not get. And also want to emphasize, we are an account underwriter. We’re not writing principally monoline. We’re not writing monoline auto. We’re not writing monoline comp, that doesn’t mean we don’t have a few policies in the inventory. But as an account underwriter, we’re focused on the overall experience on the account.

Yes, that makes sense. And then just one final one on the E&S segment. So you had about $6 million of adverse in development, so it’s kind of in a battle business in there, but the core loss ratio is down like I guess, like 13% sequentially. So it’s like you’re writing either some good new business or are you shifting the mix maybe towards more property versus casualty? So I guess, just given your history here, like why are you confident in putting up like kind of a 51 [Multiple Speakers]

Let me start on that, Chris, a little bit. I would not be – I would not put up the enormous amount of focus on that quarter number. That quarter number was significantly benefited by way lower non-cat property than expected and catastrophe than expected. So that number really adjusted is more in the upper 90s, which is where the book is running. So that, that is what I would keep the focus on

Okay.

And then this is John, I’ll just add to Greg’s point, which is from a mix perspective, there has been no significant shift from a casualty to property. That continues to be in the 75% casualty range and no real change in mix. But again, as we’ve said for a number of quarters now, we continue to like where our new business pricing is coming in where the renewal inventory is migrating to. So overall pricing levels on the existing in-force inventory we like where they are, and unfortunately, we continue to see some adverse development in some of the older accident years.

Okay. Well, very well. Thanks for all the answers. Best of luck throughout the year and then 2019.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Mike Zaremski from Credit Suisse. Sir, your line is open.

Thanks. Good morning.

Good morning, Mike.

If we could move – I know it’s not a huge line for you, but personal auto, you said you’re going to keep pushing for – it looks like high single-digit rate increases. It feels like competitors have been – have seen kind of much improved results and are kind of saying that, they don’t need a push for what they were the high singles that they were earlier in the year, last year. So just kind of curious as maybe your starting point was worse. So what are you guys seeing in personal auto?

Mike, thank you. This is John, I’ll start on the question. So, our reported combined ratio, as you saw for the quarter were 101% and 103% for nine months. We have seen significant improvement over the last several years, and our rate level continues to be stronger. And as we said in the prepared comments, our current rate filings for 2018 are averaging about 8%. And when you think about where trends are from our perspective, we need to continue to get rate in access of trends. Greg’s comments earlier about the overall industry, certainly apply to personal auto. So I think, even if there are industry participants reporting flattening or normalizing frequency trends, you still have an inflationary factor that’s going to drive up loss costs on a go-forward basis if – even if there’s no movements year-over-year in frequency. And when you add to that the fact that a lot of the increase on the physical damage side of the line is driven and then where there is PD liability is driven by the increased cost of repairing vehicles because of all of this advanced technology. That’s not going to slowdown. If the fleets continue to turnover, monoline continue to turnover and the percentage of vehicles on the road that have advanced technology and sensors and therefore our higher cost to repair, we don’t assume that’s going to stop. So, our expectation is that, we were able to [indiscernible] hard book. But our expectation is, when you look at industry performance and assume just normal loss cost inflation going forward, more rate is needed for the overall industry, that’s the stance we’re taking on this line.

Okay, great. And maybe sticking with auto, but to commercial out, you guys mentioned your telematics offering. I was just curious if you think your agent partners like – it’s kind of – this is different than what they’re used to offering. Are they exceptive of – even it could be exceptive of telematics for commercial auto, because it seems like commercial auto is right for it, given the industry’s issues. But I don’t know if the drivers or the agents want to push for telematics?

Yes, thanks, Mike. This is John, again. So I would say, our agents are excited about this. And as one point of clarification, this product that we offer Selective Drive is not used for purposes of rating individual accounts. What we have here from an agent’s perspective is a value-added products now that they go out and offer to their customer that helps them better manage their own organization, better manage their fleet, not just from a safety perspective, but I think it benefits our clear on the safety side. But it also helps them in terms of logistics management understanding where their vehicles are in any point in time and to the extent, they need to redirect vehicles to a job opportunity or delivery opportunity whatever it might be. They now are getting real-time information about where their vehicles are in addition to how they’re being operated. In terms of a loss benefit side of it, there’s no question. If anybody is unhappy about this program, or be the individual drivers whose behavior is now being more closely monitored. But the business owner in the Asian will get enormous value out of this, and I think that’s how they’re viewing it and it’s a real value-added service offering.

And I like to just to touch on that. I mean, let’s also remember the type of book that we write, Mike, which is contracting, it’s manufacturing and I understand the we’re not writing, that’s where the driver shortage is, that’s where a lot of a pushback can be where a driver turnover is high. You’re talking about the two larger fleets that we’ve done this and has been landscapers. These were large fleets of – now that business owners knows where all their vehicles are, knows fuel utilization can monitor and measure that, but also get an understanding and beat on. So this is a win-win, it’s not my – from a customer standpoint, we always are trying to find ways to measure, what I’ll call, housekeeping. There are level of risk management, whether it’s keeping their vehicles well serviced, keeping their employees well paid, doing all the right things, I view this as another item that they can add into better manage their business, but then also get a handle on all the static driving and all the other things that are happening in the marketplace. So this is something that I clearly put in the square of increasing switching costs as one of our end customers has this product, it makes it a little bit more difficult for them to move to another carrier, it does not offer the same product. And I also understand many of our customers are paying for this service now through other services that are provided.

Okay, interesting. It sounds promising. Moving to the expense ratio, the improvement has been, I think, you guys have talked to the initiatives and it’s been coming through clearly. If we’re thinking about into 2019, is it fair to assume that the improvement will level off?

Yes, Mike, it’s Mark Wilcox here. I’d say that’s probably a good assumption going into 2019. As you’ve seen on the expense ratio side, we were down about 140 basis points on a comparative quarter basis, that both points you more towards the year-to-date results. We were down about 120 basis points to 33%. You might remember the guidance we set forth early in the year was for about 80 basis points of expense ratio improvement, so that was expectation going into 2019. One element of the expense ratio improvement this year that I would expect to be sort of, call it, non-recurring is the profit-based element of the expense ratio. So with the full-year guidance of 96%, that was above our target when we went into the year of the 94.5%. So we’ve seen about – and I mentioned in my prepared comments, about 50 basis points of reduction in the profit-based element of the expense ratio. So that leaves about 70 basis points of expense ratio improvement year-to-date. So some of that will probably unwind going into 2019. But suffice to say, we’re very focused on expense ratios, very focused on continue to drive operational efficiency throughout the organization and managing the expense ratio in the context of all the other initiatives that we spoke about, including the geo expansion and the significant investments we’re making in underwriting technology and other customer experience.

Okay, great. One last one just to clarify and I can read over the transcript, too. But the non-cat weather, I thought you said it was above expectations. If you can clarify if that’s correct in which segments is it kind of a point or two above?

Yes. I mentioned that in my comments, Mike. For the quarter, we were 140 basis points above expectations for the third quarter of 2018.

And that was our Commercial Lines mostly?

Commercial and Personal, both.

Yes, that Commercial and Personal, both. We look at it kind of on the overall book of business that hits the commercial property book to some extent that has commercial auto as well to some of the physical damage property losses. But for the most part, it hits the property book within the Commercial Lines and Standard Personal Lines as well.

Okay, great. Thanks for all the insights.

Thank you. Operator, any other questions?

Yes, sir. Thank you. Our next question comes from Scott Heleniak from RBC Capital Markets. Sir, your line is open.

Hi, Scott.

Hi, good morning. Thanks. You guys mentioned in the release heightened competition in commercial lines. I was just wondering, is that – are you seeing that more evident in particular either account size or industry class? And are you seeing that pretty much across the Board, or if you saw players? Wonder if you could flush it out a little bit? And then along those lines, are you also referring to kind of more aggressive behavior or the examples you gave about credits or higher commissions and that being heightened competition that you’re talking about?

Scott, this is John. Thanks for the question. And I would say, it’s always more acute at the large-end of the market. But I would say competition on new business has gotten fairly acute up and down the spectrum. And the comments that Greg was making, I think, were specific to workers’ comp, and I think completely accurate, which is that’s a line that despite the reported results, we think are running fairly close to target for us and the industry, but yet you’ve seen significant increases in commissions across the Board that has historically been the lowest commission line for the industry. And you’re seeing companies raising base commissions and putting the short-term incentives in place that are five or more points of above standard commissions to drive new business. And you’re seeing aggressive pricing, especially on smaller lower hazard workers’ comp business from a number of competitors out in the marketplace. And again, we think there’s opportunities for us to grow new business overall. And what we’re going to do so with the same underwriting and pricing discipline that we’ve always exhibited and that we continue to exhibit on our renewal portfolio. Unfortunately, it’s harder to measure underwriting quality and pricing quality on new business accounts. We think we do a pretty good job on it. And we think in many cases, we’re competing against players who don’t really attempt to measure their quality and their pricing aggressiveness on their new business and then have to deal with it as part of the renewal portfolio and that’s a dynamic that we’re seeing out there right now.

Okay, thanks. And then on E&S, just – is it fair to say that a lot of the new business that you generate in this quarter was from the new distribution relationship? Would you expect that kind of revenue trend to continue? And would you also look for other opportunities to announce different kind of partnerships just like the one you did as you sort of remix this business?

So, Scott, this is John, again. A couple of answers there. Clearly, the reestablished relationship that we had for a number years and then left because of a change in ownership and has now come back, I would view that from your perspective as more of a book transfer, where they are now moving the business to a few other partners from the paper that used to be written on. That’s within our appetite, similar to the business, we write. We don’t really characterize it as a program, and because it’s a book transfer that it’s going to be – that won’t have an impact in the near-term, but I’ll settle into more of a normal run rate just like every other agency would once they established a core book of business they’re going to move over upon appointment. But beside that, we continue to add locations to our wholesale distribution plan with E&S, where it made sense for us on a geographic basis and we will continue to do that going forward. But it’s a small book of business. This was a bigger relationship that impacted the quarter. We don’t necessarily think about growth rates at that kind of level continuing.

All right. Okay, that’s helpful. And then one – just one last one. I wonder if you could talk about just your – in general your construction and contractors book. I know you dialed that back a few years ago, and I’m sure it’s obviously benefiting from a better economy. So I’m just wondering if you can touch on that book? How it’s performing? And if you’ve seen any impact yet from higher interest rates on that book or any – anything else you can share?

Yes, this is John, again. We’ve always been a great contractor’s market. And just to clarify one of your points. I wouldn’t describe styling it back a few years ago. We’ve been growing that segment. We’ve just been growing other segments historically a little bit of a faster clip. That’s a segment that did get hit particularly hard back in the 2008 to 2010 timeframe when the recession hit. But it’s also been benefiting of late by higher growth as the housing market and construction opportunities have continued to run from an economic perspective at a pretty good CLIPS. Our book of business in that segment continues to be predominately artisan contractors, small and mid-sized artisan contractors that bring a heavier casualty focus. So it’s really GL and commercial auto-driven, which in a lot of our footprint, we view that as a big advantage for us in terms of how we manage our aggregations, the property exposure. So, we continue to see good economic growth there and we continue to really like that business and I’ll continue to be focused on growing it. But we want to maintain a balanced portfolio and continue to write some of those other segments that we’ve got a lot of success writing as well.

And I would just add to that. What surprises me on that book is the fact that our audit premium has not started to elevate over prior years relative to just trying to fund a contract, any market right now relative to getting things done. So the construction seems like it’s fairly full, but that’s something we have a very close eye on audit premium, make sure that we don’t get into a situation, where we get behind in audit premium. So that’s an area that we have a very close focus on as well.

Overall, we’re comfortable with the probability in that book. We don’t put out combined ratios by asking you, but that’s a book that really is a significant part of our overall commercial portfolio and is reflective of that profitability.

Is there any state you feel like you’re a little bit overweight in compared to the other states, obviously, mid-Atlantic, sure bigger states, but is there other states that you…?

Our larger state obviously is New Jersey, represents approximately 20% of our premium. And I think, you’ve heard us over the year, Scott, methodically talk about trying to get better diversification across the country. That’s why when we first stated the E&S segmentation, that was principally a casualty book, about 75-25 casualty property. It gave us diversification across the country. And then as we started to migrate now in the Arizona, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, eventually looking at the Northwest as well, that changes the catastrophic kind of exposure that we have and gives us a little bit more diversification as well. So we’ve always been focused on diversification. We always try to manage our Northeast win or even Southeast win exposure, and that’s something that I feel we do an excellent job as an organization.

And Scott, just to clarify, are you talking overall geographic mix or contractor, specifically?

Well, I was talking about contractors, specifically. But if there’s anything else – it sounds like you’re doing that across the Board and that’s – that contractor is just one part of it?

Yes, we are.

Okay. Thanks a lot, guys.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Bob Farnam with Boenning & Scattergood. Sir, your line is open.

Hi there. Thanks. Just a couple of questions. One is the other or alternative investment income. Just any details in there? What types of investments generated that solid $7.2 million performance?

Yes. Bob, this is Mark Wilcox here. We have – we look at our alternative investment portfolio in a couple different categories. One of which is the legacy portfolio versus the new kind of the new commitment that was made post 2015. We did have one investment at energy-related investment in the legacy portfolio that had a very strong income quarter in the third quarter that drove about – it’s about $1.7 million. So that was part of the reason for the increase. But overall, when you look at the legacy portfolio versus the new commitments, about – called about $4 million of this – of the $7.2 million came from the news commitments, about $3.2 million came from the legacy commitment, so then with the legacy half came from one relatively large investment that we made a number of years ago.

Okay. Thanks, Mark. And I think question for John. In your commentary, you’re talking about the take-up on the digital platform by the small businesses. And I just wanted to know, are you talking – are they going direct? Are the business owners making coverage decisions on their own? Like I’m trying to get a feel for what what types of businesses are doing that and how it – how the process actually works?

Yes, great question. And just to clarify, we’re generally talking about non-coverage decisions here. What we – the digital take-up rates we’re referring to are mostly around active utilization of our self-service platform. In our self-service platform, in addition to getting policies and bills on a digital delivery basis, the self-service platform allows customers to access information about their accounts real-time, but also to initiate basic transactions with regard to adding or deleting vehicles or getting auto ID cards or getting certificates of insurance on the Commercial Lines side. But to the extent, those needs to be underwritten or produced by an agency, personal license agent, that’s handled traditionally. This is just a portal for them. It’s not a new business acquisition and are not making coverage changes on their own. We still have either one of our license professionals in the service center or the agency personnel whose license can be able to complete those transactions like they always would.

Okay. Yes, I just wanted to clarify that, because I – that’s what I figured what’s the case. I didn’t think that they’re making the coverage decisions on their own, but I just wanted to verify that, so…?

Yes, and at the same time, we’re also trying to continue to find ways to eliminate the need for that human interaction, and this is what’s not adding value and only have that interaction where it’s adding value, so more self-service all the way through But when coverage issues come up that’s something that definitely we’ll involve a professional.

Okay. Thanks, John.

And, operator, any other questions on the line?

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] One moment please for the next question.

Operator, if there are no further questions, then we’ll conclude the call right now.

Yes. It appears no questions in the queue.

All right. Thank you very much for participating in the call. If you have any follow-up items, please contact Mark or Rohan. Thank you very much.

And that concludes today’s conference. Thank you all for participating. You may now disconnect.