Welcome back, everyone, to the Bank of America Financial Services Conference. If you're joining us on the webcast, this is the AXIS Capital session. Thank you for listening. Today, we have sort of a very unique situation here because we have both Albert Benchimol and Vince Tizzio here, the outgoing and incoming CEOs of AXIS. I think some of my questions are going to be directed at trying to understand, to some extent, the role of the CEO and what it's like coming in and what it's like having had this experience. That's where it's going to be directed. If anyone in the audience has some questions, just raise a hand. I won't stand in ceremony, and you can certainly ask a question. Let me give you just a little background about both Albert and Vince. Albert is president and CEO, and he's been in that role since May 2012, joined as the CFO in January 2011. Prior to that, he spent a decade, even over a decade, as the CFO of PartnerRe. I remember even earlier than that, the treasurer of Reliance. I assume a little bio work. You were at the Bank of Montreal before that. I didn't know that. Next, Vince was just recently appointed to being the CEO. He was brought into AXIS to be CEO of the specialty insurance and then the reinsurance portfolios, both of them. Formerly, he was the CEO of the Navigators Group, which was sold to Hartford in 2019. You did a couple of years' work at the Hartford before making this transition here. That's right. Prior to his time at Navigators, you were with Zurich and AIG before that. That's right. We're very happy to have them both here. Let's just talk a little bit about the portfolio changes that have gone on over there. I feel that AXIS has reinvented itself a couple of times. This is clearly a period of reinvention. I have some specific questions here, but maybe some overall views about what's happening in 2023. It's really been a, I would say, this phase been maybe a two-and-a-half-year change that's culminating what's happening right now. How would you describe the changes in the portfolio at AXIS and what AXIS is trying to bring to the customer today? You want me to start? Sure. I think we're a very different company today than we were five years ago, right? In 2017, over 50% of our business was reinsurance business. We had very large limits. We had a lot of cat exposure. As a result of that, as you know, we suffered a little bit from the high cat activity over the last five years. Over these last five years, we've been very diligently transitioning to be more of a specialty insurer. Today, we are a company, 2022, we delivered on a pro forma basis, 71% of our business was specialty insurance. I expect that in 2023, 75% of our business will be specialty insurance. Our limits have come down significantly. Last year, we exited completely the property-property cat reinsurance business. We think of ourselves as a specialty insurer with very strong market positions in wholesale and E&S, both in the U.S. and London, and with a small but very focused reinsurance business that complements the risk that we take on the insurance side. If you look at our results, very grateful that many people that we've met today talked about the fact that we're probably one of the best improved companies over the last three, four, five years in terms of improvements in loss ratio, improvements in consistency of performance. 2022, our 11% operating ROE placed us in the middle of the pack of well-performing specialty companies. We're not declaring victory. We've still got a long way to go. In terms of the portfolio, we exited the businesses that we don't want to be in. We invested in the businesses that we believe will drive our future. While we, of course, will respond in an agile way to market conditions, we like the portfolio that we have today. Vince? I would say thank you, Albert. It's good to be with you, Josh, and meet you in person. I think we're going to continue the momentum that we've reported through 2022 in our predominant business, the insurance business. We are well-poised to continue servicing the wholesale markets around the world, have a broad product array to complement the differentiated needs of those respective customer bases. Further, we're very well-positioned out of our Lloyd's Syndicate, which has had substantial improvement over the years, even recognized in 2022 by Lloyd's as a top-designated syndicate. We're very proud of that and their accomplishment. Finally, we have a number of aspirations to yet harvest in respect to our data insights, our digital journey, and of course, talent. We continue to be an attractive organization to attract talent in our various positions, and we're excited about the prospects of that as well. If we talk about a mix of business, and I often try and explain to investors, it's not exactly the same thing, but they're trying to pick stocks, and you're trying to pick the most efficient portfolio of risks that you possibly can. You say, "Look, we've repositioned the portfolio." You've repositioned the portfolio for 2023. 2024 is going to be a different situation, and 2025. How do you think about making long-term portfolio decisions that this is where we want to play as a long-term general position in the market? Pricing is going to change under your feet while you're there versus the shorter-term changes around the edges. How do you think about what is the right mix of business over a multi-year period? How do we know the answers? I think it ties first to our identity. We're a specialty underwriter. As a specialty underwriter, there's a defined set of products and capabilities that we think are necessary to bring to market to service the needs of the customers we aspire to have in our portfolio. It's obviously buttressed by financial targets within our business model to make certain that we're delivering a fair return to our shareholders, while at the same time delivering value to the various customers. We think that strategy serves us in the definition of the products, the geographies, and the qualifications of the teammates that have to support the underwriting and the servicing of that business. Yeah, look, I think that there are big moves and small moves, right? As a specialty underwriter, you're always going to make small moves. You're going to respond to what's happening in terms of pricing, loss trends, and so on. I think in terms of big moves, you also have to declare what you're aiming for. I think the big thing that we've talked about is, A, we want to have a much more stable portfolio. We want to exit things that will drive large volatility in our results, and that's the exit from property cat. When you go from north of 50% reinsurance to potentially 20% or less, you're basically also making a big move in terms of the fact that we are not a 50/50 company. We're not a predominantly reinsurer. We are predominantly primary specialty. Those things don't change. They won't change in 2024. They won't change in 2025. We basically have under 30% of our book in property. The rest is mid and longer tail lines. Again, we like that. We like the fact that we've got a large exposure in international markets versus U.S. markets. All of those things are likely to stay because Vince will be in charge and I won't, but they're likely to stay. In any one year, we'll grow or shrink any line of business based on the opportunities. Provided there's no ace seasonal North Atlantic hurricanes between now and June 1, you've materially reduced your property cat risk, and after June 1, that will be a complete transformation, which lowers your earnings volatility by a significant amount. It also frees up capital. To what extent can you talk about your capital flexibility, given the less weight from having heavy PMLs weighing on the results? In terms of total transparency, our cat exposure going forward, we still have some Japanese exposure. The Japanese contracts renew April 1. April 1. We do have Japanese exposure through April 1. To your point, we will have some exposure in the U.S., although not as much given that we've been reducing it going forward. I think that there is no doubt that getting out of property cat provides us with two benefits. One is we're freeing up some capital, which we're very pleased will fund ongoing growth of the specialty insurance business. B, probably allows us to position our balance sheet to one that can afford a little bit more leverage, actually, than that of a volatile reinsurer. Whereas in the past, we were targeting a leverage ratio in the mid-20s, we can probably handle a leverage ratio in the mid to high-20s with a different book of business. That will give us financial flexibility and will give Vince and the team financial flexibility going forward to then make the decisions that are most optimal for the company and for its shareholders. AXIS has been around for 21 years, I always felt AXIS, in a big way, represented itself as a gross line underwriter. There's always a use for reinsurance, we said 1/1, you buy reinsurance for your insurance book. Now that insurance is a bigger proportion, it's more meaningful that you do selective purchasing. Also, even though you've reduced it, you are a seller. The 1/1 market just happened. Can you talk about your experience both as a buyer and as a seller of reinsurance on your 1/1 renewals? Sure. On the insurance side, we have several covers, of course, at 1/1, not all of which renewed. I can tell you that within our planning process, we had contemplated a changing landscape in our purchases, both in respect to the quantum of what might be available and the terms, conditions, and Ceding Commissions associated. We have gone through those evaluations culminating in the 1/1s, as you say, we had a couple of our renewals go off, in large keeping, they were as we had expected. We feel as though the rate posture that we have against those classes that were subject to the renewals are adequately contemplated. Albert gave really extensive detail on the year-end call of 2022 around our reinsurance performance at 1/1, I think we feel together very good about how that concluded for the team, both in respect to, I guess, disabusing the notion that without property catastrophe, we couldn't be a viable solution for our customers. We think that was not shown as a showing within our portfolio. Secondly, we had highly selective standards on the new business that we wanted to secure within the re portfolio, Albert spoke to that in the fourth quarter call as well in terms of percentages. I think net-net, we feel positioned well in responding to any changing incoming changes in our reinsurance purchases. We think that the market is still generally favorable and that we are able to generally pass our rates onto our insurers. If I look at the last few years, obviously the underlying margins on the insurance business have improved dramatically at a period of time that for many of your competitors and AXIS peers, Ceding Commissions are going up on those placements because the market's more competitive, you're a much more attractive partner for a reinsurer than you might've been three years ago because they're like, "Oh my gosh, look at the profitability of this business." How have the Ceding Commission changes affected the company at 1/1? I imagine it was a positive situation for a company like AXIS, given the profitability of the underlying business. I think net, that's true. In terms of the attractiveness of the underlying businesses that are going out, you're right. There have been improvements in the underlying loss ratio in many of these businesses. I think it's a little early to make definitive statements. Most of our large Quota Shares actually renew April, May, and June. We'll know then. We did have one Quota Share that renewed at 1/1. That was our Cyber Quota Share, where we have a 60% Quota Share. Our Ceding Commission was down by one point. Sorry, it was down by one point. That's basically it. We'll have the other ones. Look, at the end of the day, thank you for recognizing that the results are meaningfully improved on both a gross and a net basis. I think our reinsurers see that. I think we've got strong reinsurance partnerships. We've already been working very diligently with our brokers and reinsurance partners to start laying the groundwork for the renewals that we're going to see coming up in April, May, and June. Right now, we feel confident about our ability to renew our reinsurance on acceptable terms. Obviously, in a number of lines, we expect to pay a little bit more. I think very critically, and Vince, you can speak to that, it's our expectation that we will be able to pass on any incremental reinsurance costs to protect our margins. I think all the way back to when you and Pat Thiele turned over the management over at PartnerRe, obviously you came into AXIS and there was a management turnover then. You are no stranger to it. What's your experience on successful management turnovers, Albert? What kind of advice do you have here as this change right here with you and Vince changing the roles? Well, the most important thing, I think, in any transition is making sure that you've got an understanding before, during, and after going through it. I think we've practiced truly best practices in terms of transitions. We knew strategically what we were looking for in our next CEO, right? We've spoken about our transition to a company that is primarily a specialty underwriting insurer, number one. Number two, in speaking to our producers, they've all told us the same thing in terms of the fact that historically, AXIS was a large account, large limits, large premium organization. We've taken the premiums down. We've taken the limits down. There is huge opportunity in small to mid-market accounts that we had worked in but had not really fully developed. The encouragement that we were getting from our wholesalers in particular was that there was a significant volume of small to middle market account that was available to us if only we could expand our appetite. We knew that we wanted a strong underwriting executive, a specialist, and somebody with a strong track record in small specialty business because that would be an avenue for growth for us. After a number of years of looking at that profile, we were hiring to a profile, we identified, found Vince, and we were very fortunate in convincing him to join AXIS. Secondly, we took the time to, as much as we thought we knew him and as much as he had a great profile, it's always better to know who you're dealing with. He's been with us since the beginning of 2022. We saw him interact with our employees, with our brokers, with our board. We saw that his values, his work ethic, all aligned with what we were looking for. I think once we had that, it was then a question of making sure that we had an appropriate transition period. Transition periods are better short than long. I think we announced it in December. It's going to happen in May. After that I will remain to support Vince, excuse me, in any capacity that makes sense, but he will be the CEO. I think everything's really worked out the way it should work out. Given both your experience at AXIS, Albert, and yours with Navigators, what sort of things are harder to change? You would hope that you'd say, "Look, I have a vision," and you were going to try and push that vision into the company that you're trying to guide. What things are more stubborn and harder to change, and what things tend to change with direction, desire, and whatnot? I think the culture at our organization or any organization underpins the ability to affect change that you strategically think is in the best interest of the company. I think we at AXIS have a culture that's adult-like, collaborative, wants to out-serve, out-earn against those that we compete with. I think that in terms of difficulty, I think it's less about difficulty, Josh, and more about offering an explanation of what the benefit will be, why we want to get there, in whatever respect, whether it's operational transformation, deepening our consistency in earnings generation, harvesting the betterment of our investments in data and analytics or digital. I think those are things that we're really excited about. I think our culture allows for a lot of this work to continue, and this work preceded certainly my joining the company, and I think it's just been added to. If I can take a broader view, I think that the things that are always difficult to change are culture and customer and broker perceptions, right? Appetite to risk, which is tied to culture. I'd like to believe that we have continued to evolve those over the last decade, that we've refined them to where we think there's real clarity in terms of our risk appetite. You've heard us talk about it now for five years, very publicly. We've evolved our customer relationships to a position where they're very strong now. I'd like to believe that Vince is taking over a company that is probably in the best shape it's ever been. It's got a long way to go still. At the very least, I think that this is about moving forward and building on the progress rather than having to fix something. You mentioned data analytics and technology. It's something we don't really get to see at all as investors. We don't know it. In 2001, when AXIS was formed, I feel there was an idea that there was a huge advantage in being a startup, that all the legacy systems could be built from scratch. I don't know, Albert, when you came in in 2011, 2012, I don't know whether that advantage felt any different than the technology at PartnerRe or whatnot, which was started a decade earlier. Now you're going to be the third CEO of the company. You're no longer a spring chicken anymore, AXIS. You are a legacy company in some ways. Of course, if you could go back in time, you would change things differently to always spend as little on technology as possible, but exactly what you need. Are the systems as competitive as any systems out there in the marketplace today? You need to make more investments in the future. How does that sort of perfect technology thing keep pace with what you need to be the best at what you do? We've invested over $100 million every year in IT, right? It's our largest single line item. We've made all the changes that are necessary to stay up to speed. Today, the good news is that the "legacy" part of AXIS is that the work has been done. We've got Duck Creek in place for our insurance system. We've got SICS in place for our reinsurance system. We've got Oracle in place for our financial systems. We've got Workday in place for our HR systems. We've got all the systems in place. We continue to upgrade our systems. We just put in a brand new reserving system in place. We haven't shirked on investing for the right technology. I would argue that one of the opportunities in front of us is that we have a very high operational leverage available to us. We could grow our top line significantly without making any meaningful improvements in our expenses. In 2022, our dollars of expenses in G&A, for example, were up about a quarter of what our top-line growth was. We saw meaningful improvements in G&A. That's an area, I think, for ongoing opportunity for AXIS to grow in this market where we think we can grow profitably and get the operational leverage that can help us have a long-term positive impact on our expense ratio. Over the past four or five months, a number of reinsurance stocks are up fairly dramatically. Renaissance three, Arch is about three on two times book. Everest about one and a half. As I was talking over what I might ask with Miranda, she said, "Well, we're not really a reinsurance company anymore. I said, "Fine." I have to look at those companies or consult. RLI trades at four and a half times book, and right now, AXIS is at about 1.1 times book. There's a lot of opportunities for you to put money to work in the business at what you perceive as very high returns. When you look at where your stock is trading, what you think the potential is, and when you look at the opportunity of deploying capital into returning to shareholders at a very attractive discount to peers versus putting money to work in your business, because now is the time, because the returns are attractive, how do you balance those two sort of antagonistic impulses for what to do with capital? Do you want me to start? I think 1.1 is probably wrong, but we're still dissatisfied with our stock price. I think that what really matters for us- Ex AOCI, maybe. I don't know. Okay. I think we're still a little bit above that, but that's fine. Fine. I think the thing that matters is what is the right strategy for the long-term value creation of this organization. I think we have a unique opportunity in the near term to take advantage of our momentum in the market. We've got outstanding relationships with our customers and producers. The market still has meaningful opportunity for profitable growth, and I think there's an opportunity to build greater moats around our business and further reinforce our positioning in these markets, number one. Number two, growth will provide an avenue for a meaningful reduction of our expense ratio going forward. That is something that we can benefit from every year. If you look at our results, and I'll just use specialty insurance since it's the bulk of our business, we have very attractive loss ratio in our business. I think last year, our insurance business came in at about a 52%, which is one of the better loss ratio. When we look at our overall numbers, we recognize we could benefit from dropping our G&A by one or two points. We think that we can do that using the operational leverage that we have with our platform. Getting us from an $8 billion company to a $10 billion company will make us a stronger company. It'll make us better entrenched in the markets where we're already well-positioned, importantly, will give us an annual benefit in our G&A ratio going forward, which I think will ultimately help the profitability and, God willing, the shareholders. Let's talk about a few lines of business. You are a go-to market for cyber. Huge rate increases over the past few years, maybe moderating a little bit, the growth profile long-term for cyber, especially in the small and middle market area, is very, very strong. Where's rate adequacy today? How much share can you take given what you already have as exposure? Do you take more share on a growth basis, maybe you cede it out because you know what the price is and are happy to serve, I don't know if facultative is the right term, maybe when you say, we'll write it and because there's an arbitrage there. What is the opportunity for AXIS to be bigger than they already are in the cyber market? Albert and I describe cyber as a line of business like many that we have humility toward. We like the design of our product. We like the governance in our risk selection processes. We call it hygiene internally. We have a scaled business, as you know. We have a wonderful practitioner leader, well regarded globally. I think that the prospects of continuing to meaningfully participate in the class, it has been shown. I think that the business has had compounded rate that we reported on the fourth quarter, well over 130-odd%, over these last several years. The runway of growing is not the challenge. It's doing it measurably. It's doing it with the same level of premium adequacy, confidence that we have, and to make certain that we're ever mindful of the developing views of risk in respect of the tail. I think we feel pretty good about where we are, the expectation of a line that we have, and certainly with the team that leads it day to day. Look, cyber, you've heard us say this, we think is going to be one of the major lines. In a digital world, I don't see how everybody in the world doesn't need some form of Cyber Insurance. We feel very proud of the fact that we are a leader in the world. One of the reasons we got out of property cat is we wanted to make sure that we had better control of our volatility, that we were thoughtful about where we were taking risk and the tail scenarios. I think we have to recognize that there are still some catastrophic tail scenarios in cyber, such that we want to address limits of management, exposure management, in a way that makes us comfortable, that we're comfortable along a wide range of potential outcomes. We have absolutely the ability and capacity, should we want to write meaningfully more cyber. Right now, our appetite is guided not by adequacy, because I think the price is adequate now, but it's by the size of the tail that we take. We're comfortable with the size of the tail that we have now. We can certainly grow it as we grow the rest of the book, we don't want to have an oversized tail to cyber in the very same way as we don't want to have an oversized tail to natural catastrophes. I think it totally makes sense. Look, I'm trying to understand what that tail is. I don't know if we've seen the Cyber cat event. It kind of dovetails in the same theme. I want to talk about terrorism, another line of business where you're a go-to market. Do we have enough information about what the loss profile looks like for Cyber or for a line like terrorism that we know whether the pricing is adequate? Like, how do we envision that the terrorism cat or the Cyber cat event that we're worried about that you're trying to manage against? That's where the term humility comes in, right? There's probably 7 very highly respected models out there, including the ones that we tweak on our own. They all have different perspectives. Those are all supported by the RDS, the disaster scenarios that go through it. We have to recognize that it's a 20-odd-year-old line of business. It's evolving. We're not dealing with just happenstance. We're dealing with people who are looking to cause harm. For all of those reasons, I think that the scenarios, and the modeling have a pretty wide range of outcomes. I think that over the last 18 months, the spread of those ranges has come down as we learn more about the book of business, as the construct of the wordings improve. There's still some range, and it's because of that that we think it's really important to make sure that we manage the tail exposure. Look, I think this can go a lot of ways. When I first started learning about Cyber, let's say 10, 15 years ago, it seemed like the big risk was cyber breach. Somebody stealing information seemed to be what you were purchasing the cover. Now it feels like ransomware is. What does it cover? Are there other things that have not been tested that are in the coverage that still so far the hygiene has managed or maybe the loophole? I want to link it to terrorism a little bit because Cyber terrorism, is that a terrorism cover? Is that a Cyber cover? Will there be some sort of gap where it's argued, "Oh, we don't have responsibility because that was a non-state actor who was engaged in" You worry about all these things, like what are the risk factors we need to think about in both those lines that aren't necessarily being fully contemplated right now? Two different classes. There's certainly other exposures to loss in the cyber offering. You read about phishing PH, right? Lots of phishing matters out there as a more emergent exposure in terms of what you're reading about. It's been around for a long time, oftentimes not reported, in public disclosures, but it's an exposure loss that is addressed under a cyber form. I think terrorism is a different circumstance. There is data to support. A lot for buildings, right? Yeah. We're really talking about building coverage. Blast zones and things of that sort. I think we underwrite them in different ways, but there's a commonality to the extent that you view the catastrophe event differently defined, whether it's as horizontal could be reasoned between terrorism and cyber, of course. I do think we have separate standards that govern our tolerance of risk and ultimately what we're willing to take on a catastrophe basis. I think on an individual risk basis, they're both reasonably well structured and priced. The issue is aggregation. Obviously, terrorism is one that you manage both with a limits basis and a zonal aggregation. I think on cyber, we do get the benefit, if you would, of the war exclusions, the infrastructure exclusions. To the extent that something can actually affect a wide swath of the economy through the grid, for example, we do have language that says that's not covered. That's at least one protection. The other thing is I believe that this is a line of business that's also evolving a lot, and I think to the benefit of the industry. We'll get smarter, we'll get better wordings over time. I expect that, in 2023, 2024, we'll see much greater participation of the capital markets. ILS markets will provide more capacity, more cat capacity. That'll all be to the benefit of both the providers of cyber insurance and the customers of cyber insurance. Because if we have more confidence in our ability to manage the tail, we'll be happy to provide more capacity to our customers. Moving away from low frequency, high severity coverages, let's go to the opposite end of the spectrum to high frequency, low severity coverages and talk about your presence in the pet market. When did AXIS get into pet insurance? The data, I guess, is widely available in some ways to learn. How long does it take for a company like AXIS to say, "Here's the underlying data. We have a product that we can sell." How long does it take to become a market player in something where there's a lot of data available, and it's a matter of you becoming adept at underwriting that information? We were evaluating and studying this line of business with our partner for 3 years before we wrote our first policy. We've been monitoring what they've been doing and their capabilities. This is a line of business that's gone- By the way, when you say partners, I know you have another underwriter who you work with, but there's a marketing company and there's an underwriter who you share risk with? Yeah. It's pet insurance that we're doing in partnership through- Yeah A firm who's marketing it for us. The data is incredibly granular, to the point where we have data by breed of cats and dogs and animals, by veterinary costs, by regions, and so on. We feel that the data that we have is both timely and sufficiently granular. It's a line of business that you've got to stay on top of. The good news is the trends are very easily observable because you get the bills on a monthly basis. What I can tell you is 3 years of studies, a close partnership, and our results to date, 2022, and as we look into 2023, have been better than our initial expectations. Like everything else that we do, we got to stay on top of it and make sure that we monitor loss trends. For the moment, the experience has been good for us and it's one that we look at and we'll probably write over time north of $100 million. I mean, it's still going to be a small part of our overall book, but we think it's one that will make a positive contribution to our overall book. That's recorded in your accident and health lines and in your underwriting. Is that similar to how accident and health has been underwritten at AXIS for a long period of time? You've created quite a business there and when we think about barriers to entry, pet is obviously a very competitive market, but accident and health, I feel like sometimes international location has helped in barriers to entry and whatnot. What sort of barriers to entry overall for the broader accident and health business, which is very profitable and formidable at AXIS. To what extent are your competitors kept from being able to come into your markets? Thank you for recognizing that. Obviously in our business, there are no guarantees and no ownership of any market. You earn your position every day through your service, your ability to work well with your producers, with your customers. That's really what we do. One of the things that I feel incredibly proud of is we have leaders with strong market reputations who've been with us, in some cases, from the beginning of the line. Jay Hamilton who runs our insurance A&H business, has been with us since 2010. Rich Phillips, who runs our A&H reinsurance business, has been with us since 2012, right? These teams have been there, they've got lifelong relationships, and we just keep working them. The other thing that we've been doing within AXIS, again, over the last several years, is I think we've done a much better job of coordinating our distribution management such that we're leveraging our relationships with our producers to see more opportunities. As you see more wholesalers buying A&H distributors, for example, now we can leverage these relationships and say, "Look, we do all this great stuff for you here." How about that? We've seen some A&H opportunities come to us as certain A&H producers have been acquired by some of our wholesale relationships. There's a better management of distribution going forward, so we can leverage that too. Changing gears a little bit, maybe if Pete were here, he might chime in on this one, go back to the beginning a bunch of 2001 startups, including AXIS, and reinsurance was attractive because you could set up a business where you could do all your business on the island of Bermuda, and most of these companies were largely tax advantaged. Although perhaps the transformation to being an insurance company is great at AXIS, the other peers of yours have also been sort of trying to pivot to insurance over time. I think that your insurance exposure as a percentage of overall is greater than most of those very same peers, yet you've managed the tax situation better than some other companies who have higher tax rates now than they did in 2002. Your tax rates still are pretty attractive and competitive. I don't need to know all the inner workings, I do need to know whether it's sustainable. Given all the changes we've seen in the past five years, I guess, in the U.S. tax rate and tax code, can AXIS continue to be a low-cost tax provider for the kind of coverages that it writes? The usual caveats about tax rates is that the taxes we pay are based on the geography of our income. We tend to model based on the geography of our income, and Pete Vogt tends to guide people to something around a low double digit, 10% type average tax rate. I've never seen it. Sometimes it's lower. The fourth quarter was higher, but average, it's been that, right? It depends on the geography of tax rates. Some countries are going to raise their tax rates, which means that we'll pay more in those taxes. At the end of the day, we don't control what countries will do with regard to their own tax rates, and ultimately, we do have to follow the business where it is. I do believe that our model and the way we manage it, and our Bermuda base is such that it allows us to, whatever it will be for others, we should be on the low end of the scale. We can't guarantee what the number will be. In any one year, the geography of our gains and losses will be different. I think that we do have as good an organizational structure as we can, and the numbers will be what they will be, but it ought to be on the lower end of the scale. No. I wish you the best of luck in this transition. I want to say, just so everyone knows, Albert's around till May. Luckily we have another quarter. Thank you really much for the time. It's been enlightening, and thank you for AXIS being here. Thank you. Thank you.