Good morning. My name is Steve, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the fourth quarter 2014 earnings conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question during this time, simply press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, please press the pound key. Thank you. Dennis McDaniel, Investor Relations Officer, you may begin your conference.
Hello, this is Dennis McDaniel from Cincinnati Financial. Thank you for joining us for our fourth quarter 2014 earnings conference call. Late yesterday, we issued a news release about our results along with our supplemental financial package, including our quarter and investment portfolio. To find copies of any of these documents, please visit our investor website, cinfin.com/investors. The shortest route to the information is the quarterly results link in the navigation menu on the far left. On this call, you'll first hear from Steven Johnston, President and Chief Executive Officer, and then from Chief Financial Officer, Mike Sewell. After their prepared remarks, investors participating on the call may ask questions.
At that time, some responses may be made by others in the room with us, including Cincinnati Insurance Company's Executive Committee Chairman, Jack Schiff Jr., Chairman of the Board, Ken Stecher, Chief Insurance Officer for The Cincinnati Insurance Company, JF Scherer, Principal Accounting Officer, Eric Mathews, Chief Investment Officer, Marty Hollenbeck, and Chief Claims Officer for Cincinnati Insurance, Marty Mullen. First, please note that some of the matters we will be discussing today are forward-looking. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. With respect to these risks and uncertainties, we direct your attention to the news release and to our various filings with the SEC. Also, our reconciliation of non-GAAP measures was provided with the news release. Statutory accounting data is prepared in accordance with statutory accounting rules and therefore is not reconciled to GAAP. With that, I'll turn the call over to Steve.
Thank you, Dennis, and good morning, everyone. As in recent years, I'm speaking with you today from Murfreesboro, Tennessee, the fourth stop on our tour of sales meetings with our independent agents in more than 20 states. Meeting annually with agents is essential to our relationship-oriented, agency-centered strategy. We also enjoy this part of our job and find it energizing. It's important to sincerely thank our agents in person for contributing to another year of underwriting profit and premium growth and for trusting Cincinnati Insurance as we earn the opportunity to serve the people and businesses in their communities. Turning to our financial performance, we feel good about the strong operating results we reported for the fourth quarter and for the year 2014. They continue to reflect steady execution in our underwriting and pricing.
We had our seventh consecutive quarter of investment income growth and rising valuations in equity security markets help boost book value for your company. Careful underwriting and disciplined pricing, along with an improved expense ratio, led to a fourth quarter 2014 combined ratio of 90.4%, lowering the full-year ratio to 95.6%. We are further segmenting our book of business using pricing precision and risk selection decisions that combine data models and underwriter judgment on a policy-by-policy basis. That's an ongoing focus as we seek to further improve underwriting results. We think those actions will continue to provide benefits over time as we aim for a combined ratio below 95% in 2015. Working with our agents, we benefit from the local presence of our field underwriters who make those decisions for all of our commercial new business.
Their decisions are informed by analytics and risk inspection data from our ongoing loss control program. We're pleased that 2014 was another year in which we met our premium growth objective of outpacing industry growth, thanks to strong retention and satisfactory renewal pricing. Growth we reported for the fourth quarter reflected the favorable offsetting effect of the same factor that slowed growth reported last year, the 2013 estimate for business in the pipeline. Reported last quarter of the 2013 estimate for business in the pipeline. As we noted several times before, we tend to avoid drawing conclusions about trends based on a single quarter of data for certain measures, including premium growth. Part of our long-term strategy is to appoint agencies in areas where we are underrepresented, taking care to preserve established agency relationships and the franchise value they enjoy.
In 2014, we appointed 99 new independent agencies and plan to appoint about 100 more in 2015. Our agency partners do a great job helping us retain profitable accounts. Policy retention for both commercial and personal lines was generally consistent with a year ago. Our commercial lines policy retention continues near the high end of the mid-80% range, and personal lines policy retention continues in a low to mid-90% range. We continue to work hard to earn new business through our agencies. New products and services, such as expanding programs offered through our Target Markets department, are an important part of growing new business. We're also excited by new business opportunities we'll see by expanding our current products and services aimed at high net worth policyholders and offered through our personal lines insurance segment.
You'll hear more about that over the next few quarters as we march towards a longer-term goal of $2 billion in the annual personal line segment premiums. Although our new business volume was down from 2013, when new business premiums reached a record level for us, our agency still produced over one-half billion dollars in new business premiums in 2014. For the fourth quarter, average renewal price increases for commercial lines remained in the low to single-digit range, a little lower than in the third quarter. That average includes the muting effect of three-year policies that were not yet subject to renewal pricing during the fourth quarter. For smaller commercial property and commercial auto policies that renewed during the fourth quarter, we continued to obtain meaningful price increases. Those commercial property policies experienced increases averaging in the high single-digit range. In commercial auto, averaged increases in the mid-single digit range.
For our personal lines policies, renewal price increases averaged near the high end of the low single-digit range. For our excess and surplus lines segment, the fourth quarter 2014 average renewal price increases continued in the mid-single digit range. That segment of our business hit a home run in 2014, with a combined ratio below 80% and net written premiums up 20%. Our life insurance subsidiary, including income from its investment portfolio, produced another quarter of steady earnings and again grew premiums in its largest product line, term life insurance. January 1st marked the renewal of our primary property casualty reinsurance treaties. Our per risk treaties terms for 2015 are similar to last year, except for increasing our retention by $2 million to $10 million per loss. That change in more favorable rates should result in approximately $21 million less in reinsurance costs for those treaties compared with 2014.
Our property catastrophe treaty also has terms similar to last year, except for increasing our retention by $25 million to $100 million per event. We expect our ceded premiums for that treaty to be approximately $8 million less than last year. In conclusion, our primary measure of long-term financial performance, the value creation ratio, ended 2014 at 12.6%. That result was toward the high end of our target, which is an annual ratio averaging 10%-13%. While a healthy stock market contributed, the majority of the 12.6% was due to the contribution of operating income. I'll now ask our Chief Financial Officer, Mike Sewell, to add his insights about our recent financial performance.
Great. Thank you, Steve, and thanks to all of you for joining us today. I'll start with some analysis of investment results. Both income and book value for the fourth quarter and full year 2014 benefited from our equity investing strategy. Dividend income from our stock portfolio rose 6% for the quarter and 13% for the year. In our core portfolio of 50 common stocks, all 50 improved their annual regular dividend over the 12-month period ending December 2014, with a median increase of 8.3%. Similar to others in our industry, yields for our bond portfolio continued to decline. The fourth quarter 2014 pre-tax average yield, reported at 4.72%, was 13 basis points lower than a year ago, while that measure on a full year was 14 basis lower.
Taxable bonds, representing nearly 70% of our bond portfolio, had a pre-tax yield of approximately 5.25% at the end of the fourth quarter 2014. The average yield for new taxable bonds purchased during the quarter was 4.49%. For the same period, our tax-exempt bond portfolio yield was 3.78%, and purchases during the quarter yielded 3.26%. Our bond portfolio's effective duration remained at the same level as one quarter ago at 4.4 years. Cash flow from operating activities continues to help our investment income grow. Funds generated from net operating cash flows for the year 2014 were up 10% to $873 million, contributing to $324 million of net purchases of securities for our investment portfolio. Careful expense management continues to be a priority, and together with premium growth, contributed to a 1.3% points of improvement to our full year 2014 underwriting expense ratio.
We like to analyze the underwriting expense ratio's two components, commissions and non-commission expenses. The commission components tend to vary with recent year underwriting profitability. It also considers three-year profitability by agency. If the commission ratio were to rise, it should be more than offset by a lower loss ratio. The non-commission component tends to vary as a result of investments we make in the property casualty business, such as enhancing pricing and underwriting expertise. Again, we believe it would be worth the trade-off of a short-term increase in that component to create overall value for investors and others. We plan to continue to have non-commission expense dollar volume grow more slowly than premium volume, producing a favorable effect on the non-commission expense ratio. Next, let's turn to loss reserves.
I'd like to emphasize that we follow a consistent approach and that we've experienced 26 consecutive years of overall favorable reserve development. We continue to aim for a reserve reported on our balance sheet to be at levels reflecting net amounts well into the upper half of the actuarially estimated range of net loss and loss expense reserves. Our news release reported higher reserve estimates for our commercial casualty line of business. That translated in 2014 to a lower amount of total property casualty net favorable reserve development on prior accident years, although in aggregate, our other lines of businesses were slightly more favorable than in 2013. Once we complete all of our year-end reporting, you'll be able to further analyze the details. For now, I'll highlight a few important items.
For a long time, we disclosed that historical paid loss patterns are a key assumption used to make projections necessary for estimating IBNR reserves. During 2014, paid losses for commercial casualty, especially related to a few umbrella liability claims, emerged at levels higher than we expected, particularly for accident years 2005 and 2007. Considering that new data, we estimated commercial casualty IBNR reserve for subsequent accident years at levels more likely to be adequate compared with recent past quarters. Overall, our full year 2014 net favorable development was as usual, spread over several accident years, including 58% for accident year 2013, 15% for accident year 2012, 17% for accident year 2011, and 10% for all older accident years in aggregate. The capital and liquidity position of the company reflect both strength and financial flexibility.
Cash and marketable securities for our parent company, nearly $1.8 billion at the end of the fourth quarter, was up 16% for the year. Our property casualty premiums to surplus ratio at 0.9 to 1 continues to provide capital that adequately supports our plans for ongoing growth of insurance operations. We did not purchase additional shares during the fourth quarter. Full year 2014 share repurchases totaled 450,000 shares at an average price per share of $46.63. I'll conclude my prepared comments by summarizing the contributions during the fourth quarter to book value per share. Property casualty underwriting increased book value by $0.40. Life insurance operations added $0.06. Investment income other than life insurance and reduced by non-insurance items contributed $0.40. The change in unrealized gains at December 31st for the fixed income portfolio, net of realized gains and losses, decreased book value per share by $0.06.
The changes in unrealized gains at December 31st for the equity portfolio, net of realized gains and losses, increased book value by $0.77, and we declared $0.44 per share in dividends to shareholders. The net effect was a book value increase of $1.13 during the fourth quarter to a record high of $40.14 per share. Now, with that, I'll turn the call back over to Steve.
Thanks, Mike. In closing our prepared remarks, I'll note that during the fourth quarter, Fitch Ratings and A.M. Best affirmed their strong ratings of our companies. We were especially pleased that Best announced its positive outlook on the issuer credit rating of our newest company, The Cincinnati Specialty Underwriters. Since its start up in 2008, our excess and surplus lines business has established a good track record, and we expect it to continue attracting more of our agents' business. That's just one of many factors that give us confidence we can perform and benefit shareholders over the coming years. The board of directors demonstrated that they share that confidence by increasing the cash dividend to $0.46 per share. That action sets the stage for 55 consecutive years of dividend increases.
We appreciate this opportunity to respond to your questions and also look forward to meeting in person with many of you during the remainder of the year. As a reminder, with Mike and me today are Jack Schiff, Jr., Ken Stecher, J.F. Scherer, Eric Mathews, Marty Mullen, and Marty Hollenbeck. Steven, please open the call for questions.
Thank you. At this time, I would like to remind everyone, in order to ask a question, please press star and the number 1 on your telephone keypads. We'll pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes from the line of Vincent D'Agostino. Your line is open.
Good morning, Cincinnati.
Good morning.
Just to start. The press release noted some actions on the agency management side in terms of the territories and then an affirmation of the commitment to agent service. I'm just curious if any of the plans there reflect any changes in the competitive landscape or if it's really just that as an affirmation of that agent model.
This is J.F. Just an affirmation of the agent model. That's the theme of our sales meetings this week is how pleased we are with how they're performing for us.
The way we define it for our agencies is that we obviously want to help them when it comes to writing insurance and helping them with their success there. We're also very much interested in helping them with their business management, agency management, sales management types of things, providing capital for them. That's really what we're hitting at there.
Okay. Then just for Steve and Mike. Sorry, I was trying to follow along with the reserve comments and simultaneously moving through your Schedule P, which I may have gotten a little lost here, if I heard things right, we're talking IBNR reserve movement primarily on accident years 2005 and 2007 for the commercial casualty. Was that the gist?
Yeah, that's exactly right. It was really those two areas where we did see some increased payments. As we do look at paid losses, that helps to project our IBNR picks. With some increased payments and then also a couple of reserve changes that were really just in those two accident years. It was that new information that we usually take our consistent conservative approach to setting reserves. That's really what did it.
Okay. I guess, like,
If I might just tag on there. This is Steve. As we looked at 2005, 2007, the largest, as Mike just mentioned, was one claim in 2005, one in 2007 that emerged in the umbrella lines. I think, we've had 26 years now of favorable development. There's two ways we could have looked at that. We could have said, well, they're anomalies, and we'll just let that emergence come out of IBNR. I think the prudent approach, and consistent with the way we do things, is to actually react to that by increasing our factors, which would then subsequently roll through the accident years and add additional IBNR to all those accident years. I think it's the prudent way to look at that.
I'm confident as you look at our Schedule Ps, that you'll find our reserves and balance sheet at least as strong at the end of 2014 as you did at the end of 2013.
Okay. I guess the root of the question, I appreciate all that, Steve, we're kind of on board with, and believe that you guys are acting prudently to what you're saying. No real question there. I guess mechanically, when I look at kind of Schedule Ps, right now I'm just flipping through CMP and then the two other liability lines. Really IBNR in those out years that last year's maturities are really kind of small. When I look at the reserve movements in the quarter, maybe I'm not capturing everything with those three lines, but am I missing anything there in thinking that by this point of maturity, there really shouldn't be that much movement? I guess that question would then be, were these couple claims just really large in size?
Yeah, I think it is more the anomaly that I think one was for about $5 million, one was for about $4 million. I do think as we look at where we carry IBNR, there is more uncertainty in the more recent years than there is in the older years, I do think that they tend to be outliers.
Okay. Sorry, just to take that point and kind of confirm my understanding. Was the claim activity on those years and that influenced some IBNR moves here in more recent years as well?
That's correct.
Okay. I understand it much better now. Thank you. Then just one last one for Marty on the investment side. We can obviously see the energy MLP in equity, energy investments move around a little bit. The historical stuff we're good with. What I'm kind of curious about is just in the current environment, do you see this as an opportunity on the energy side, or is it something where you're kind of cautiously proceeding?
I think we're probably a little bit more cautious. I mean, we were fairly fully invested as a sector in energy. The large-cap names we've got in the common stock portfolio have actually hung in there fairly well, Exxon, Conoco, Chevron. The MLP space was never a particularly large one for us, and we haven't been adding to that in recent years. I think we're just going to kind of hang steady where we're at right now.
Okay. Thanks for all the answers and best of luck, guys. Thank you.
Thank you, Vince.
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Mark Dwelle with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.
Yeah, good morning. I think you just covered some of my questions, but just to kind of finalize, I guess, or hopefully finalize on the reserve addition. The total reserve addition in the quarter was about $32 million in the commercial segment. If nine of it was related to specific claims, what was the total amount of addition? I guess where they're offsetting releases in other areas, that kind of netted it down to the $32 million.
Yeah, I think that's true. It's looked at for each accident year within each line of business, and so you're going to have areas moving in different directions that would offset.
Can you provide the amounts of what the overall positive was and the overall negative that netted down to the 32? I suppose I can derive it from the Schedule P, but.
I'm trying to see the 32. This is Mike, but on the commercial, on the one item I'm looking at, and Dennis, correct me if I'm wrong. Total commercial, it was a $26 million that was added. $29 million was from commercial casualty strength, and commercial auto was strengthened $15 million. The large offsets was the management liability, which was favorable by $12 million. Workers' comp was favorable by $7 million.
Million. Commercial property was slightly favorable for $2 million for the quarter.
Okay. Maybe I did my math wrong. I was taking the 4.4 combined ratio points and dividing it backwards. I guess netting down the catastrophe losses, maybe it comes to that lower figure. I'm sorry.
Yeah, that's exactly right. As Steve said, you do have some offsetting in that all those numbers I just gave you are spread over the several accident years evenly spread, basically.
Got it. Okay.
Great question. Thank you.
That completely satisfies me on that topic. Let's move over to new business. The amount of new business in the quarter was a nice uptick relative to last quarter, but it was still down a little bit year-over-year, which I was a little bit surprised at. Any comments you can provide there?
Yeah, Mark, this is J.F. We mentioned in the release that workers' comp was down a fair amount for us this year. We had a significant year in 2013 there. That was in the area of larger workers' comp. It's an area that we are conservative on, very pleased with the progress we're making on the loss ratio for a lot of reasons. We just simply did not write as many larger workers' comp claims, and that can tend to have a slightly muting effect on overall package business because typically our agents like to put the workers' comp with the package. I chalk that up to conservatism on that particular line of business. Maybe overly conservative, I suppose, but that would've been a factor.
The other factor that occurred and really started to occur, I think, really in maybe in the second quarter, but clearly, I think most carriers are feeling that they've reached pretty close to rate adequacy, and rather than signaling to their agents that they would be asking for and requiring fairly substantial rate increases at renewal, instead, they're defending the renewals more strongly. The atmosphere we're competing in is one where there aren't as many, what I would consider to be good accounts or easier or more desirable accounts out in the marketplace. We still have our pipeline full, segmentation is playing through for every carrier, the accounts that need the most rate or might have the more poor experience are the ones that are more likely out in the marketplace. It's just tougher from that standpoint.
A few other things I would comment on, I don't know how it affects other carriers, the M&A activity that's occurred over the last three, four years, that's fairly disruptive at the agency level. As some producers leave, the acquirers change the appetite for some agencies. We react to that. In some cases, it works out favorably for us, in some cases, the consequence might be that we would appoint more agencies, that takes a little bit more time for things to gear up. We're not pushing any panic buttons in terms of the fact that new business was down. CSU, our excess and surplus lines division continues strong. We think we have tremendous potential there. Personal lines is stabilized, and we think that you'll see an increase in new business in 2015 there.
It's maybe a little wordy, but those are kind of the observations that we have. It's very reinforcing to be out this week with our agencies and hear their opinions of the marketplace and their confidence in us. We'll keep our pipeline full, and we'll be good selectors of businesses as this year proceeds.
Great answer, J.F. You actually knocked out the next two questions that I was going to ask with that answer, good job. Thanks very much.
Trying to be efficient.
Thank you. Again, if you would like to ask a question, that was star and the number 1 on your telephone keypads. Your next question comes from the line of Paul Newsome from Sandler O'Neill. Your line is open.
Good morning, folks.
Good morning, Paul.
If I heard it correctly, you are hoping to get a combined ratio next year below 95, which is about where you were today, and tell me if I'm wrong. My first question is that, is that a hope to get the accident year lower as well, or is that also a function of a normalization of reserve releases prospectively?
No, you're correct that we do want to have the calendar year go below 95, but that also implies a accident year improvement as well and no change in our relative reserve margin.
Terrific. Big picture, where do you see the best opportunities for underwriting improvement? Is it on the personal line side or the commercial line side of your house?
Paul, I'll throw my two cents worth here. We're putting a lot of effort, and we've mentioned this the last several quarters, into, I guess you might say, non-rate related improvement. We still are seeing rate increases both in personal and commercial lines as already been mentioned. I might add, particularly on accounts that renew, an awful lot of what's being said by agents that have been interviewed or brokers that have been interviewed. We're not hearing that as being quite so dire in talking to our agencies this week. We think there's still opportunities with modest rate increases. We've put a lot of effort in the last few years, and we're going to continue to accelerate that in loss control, in claims specialization, in underwriting specialization, and in just general inspections of business.
We expect those kinds of activities will help us discover accounts that when we wrote them, perhaps years ago, they were better accounts than they are today. We'll react accordingly there. Our loss control efforts will help with loss mitigation efforts. Marty might want to comment on the claims side of things, but the great improvement we've had in workers' comp, for example, we think can continue in the progress we've been making there, and that's been a combination of loss control, but most especially claims specialization.
I might just add that the continued segmentation is exactly a part of what J.F. was just mentioning. That'll continue as well.
That sounds like more opportunity on the commercial side than the personal lines side of the house, given that-
We've made-
Loss control is primarily a commercial lines thing.
Well, loss control would be, but the inspection initiative, we've been inspecting about 100,000 structures a year in personal lines. Not that our agencies don't keep track of things, but where we've taken the approach that we are going to augment what our agencies do by really inspecting 100%, for example, of all the new business that we're writing. We have quite a few houses and dwelling fire policies on the books that need someone to take a look at them as well. I fully expect that there's going to be some lift in personal lines from that initiative.
This is Steve, I agree totally with J.F. It was nice to see this year, 2014, that all of our business segments came in under 100. I think they're all, as J.F. mentioned, working feverishly to continue to improve, and I see improvement potential in all segments.
Great. Thank you.
Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Joshua Shanker with Deutsche Bank. Your line is open.
Yeah. Good morning, everyone.
Morning, Josh.
Just curious about the life insurance business to the extent that over the years, I know you've always kept it a small part of the overall portfolio. How much capital does it tie up, and is it accretive to ROE or about the same ROE as the rest of the business? Could you potentially unlock value if you were to send that business elsewhere?
Josh, this is Mike Sewell. There's a difference between GAAP and stat reporting and how much you need to when you're setting the reserves, which then ends up with the capital that you have. From a GAAP standpoint, you have less reserves that are required, so you have more capital. When you look at the capital that we have and it's producing, I'll say in round numbers, $40 million of net income, that is a little bit lower ROE than what it would be on a statutory standpoint. The states are looking at principle-based reserves, and when we get there, we think we can free up some of the capital in the life company. If we had those principle-based reserves today, I would suspect that our capital in the life company would be somewhere in the $350 million-$400 million range.
It would be a 10% ROE that you would have there, which would be right in line with our 10%-13% goal for our VCR. We're very excited about the life company. We hope that the principle-based reserves will be changed, we will get to it. It's producing a nice result, and it's additive to the overall VCR for us.
Do you have an initiative in place to grow it?
Do we have an initiative in place to grow the life company?
Yes.
Yeah, we're still working on that's a part of we've been doing it. They're a part of the sales meetings that go out trying to really expand the sales, especially related to the term product. Our term product was up 7% for the year, which we're excited about. Dave Popplewell, the president of the life insurance company, is out beating the bushes and is out on the sales meeting talking to the property casualty agencies about cross-selling and being able to increase and improve the top-line results. Oh no, J.F.
Yeah, Josh, 70% of our new life premiums tend to come from property and casualty agencies. One of the things that we're doing is trying to link together our homeowner sales in an automated way through simplified issue policies to write more term insurance and help agencies in the course of writing personal lines business. That's been the case. We continue to fortify our field presence on our life insurance company. What tends to work very well is when you have a good professional that's calling on the agencies when it comes to the more business life insurance types of things to help navigate that process. Yeah, it's like a lot of things that we do, it's a very nice complement to the overall relationship we have with our agencies, and our agencies appreciate it.
Well, thank you, and good luck with that.
Thank you, Josh.
Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Vincent D'Agostino with KBW. Your line is open.
Hi again. Thanks for taking the follow-up. I think I might ask this question every year around this time, so here you go. With the agency sales meetings, I'm just curious if agents are giving you any wish lists where they'd like to see any new products or maybe it's technology widgets from Cincinnati.
Vincent, we've been really hitting them pretty hard with a lot of the things that we're doing. I'd have to say that the general tone is that between what Will Van Den Heuvel is doing in the high net worth area, they're pleased to hear about that. They're also pleased to hear that when it comes to middle market personal lines, Will is reinforcing our activity there. They're pleased with the automation that we have there. We've gone through several years of rate increases, pretty darn strong rate increases in the homeowner area, and that's not as strong any longer, so the pressure's gone there. CSU, we get a lot of feedback on that. Our agency's right, ballpark $2 billion in excess and surplus lines premium. We have tremendous opportunity to grow our E&S company there. We gradually increase our appetite in that line of business.
They're pleased to hear the news on that. Our Target Markets division has 17 programs, and that's going to expand. If there's anything, I guess, that's really created most of a wish list or a discussion at our sales meetings would be that they would ask that we continue to grow that particular division. Every aggressive agency, I would say, is niching. They have producers that go after certain industry classes. While it's not unusual for carriers to have that, what is a bit unusual from our standpoint is the fact that we have some managers in those areas that'll go out and travel with agencies, go out and make sales calls with those agencies. Maybe we outwork the competition a little bit better in that category. I would say, those would be the major areas that we've improved.
Loss control continues to be a benefit. Our agencies are good at taking our loss control rep, our claims rep, and our field underwriters out actually on the sales call. The feedback we get on that's excellent. No particular area. Cyber's talked about a bit. It's being talked about by everyone. That's on the radar screen for everyone as an emerging coverage that we're pleased to tell them we have some things in the works on.
Okay, sounds good. Thanks for all the answers. Look forward to talking soon.
Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. Steve Johnston, I turn the call back to you.
Thank you, Steven, and thanks to everyone for joining us today. We appreciate your interest in Cincinnati Financial, and we look forward to speaking with you again on our first quarter 2015 call. Have a great day.
This concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.