Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the American Financial Group Second Quarter 2019 Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this call is being recorded. I would now like to introduce your host for today’s conference Ms. Diane Weidner. You may begin.

Good morning, and welcome to American Financial Group's second quarter 2019 earnings results conference call. I'm joined this morning by Carl Lindner III and Craig Lindner, co-CEOs of American Financial Group; and Jeff Consolino, AFG's CFO. Our press release, investor supplement and webcast presentation are posted on AFG's website. These materials will be referenced during portions of today's call. Before I turn the discussion over to Carl, I would like to draw your attention to the notes on Slide 2 of our webcast. Certain statements made during this call may be considered forward-looking statements as defined under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are not guarantees of future performance. Investors should consider the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and/or financial condition to differ materially from these statements. A detailed description of these risks and uncertainties can be found in AFG's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are also available on our website. We may include references to core net operating earnings, a non-GAAP financial measure, in our remarks or responses to questions. A reconciliation of net earnings attributable to shareholders to core net operating earnings is included in our earnings release. If you are reading a transcript of this call, please note that it may not be authorized or reviewed for accuracy, thus it may contain factual or transcription errors that could materially alter the intent or meaning of our statements. Now, I am pleased to turn the call over to the Carl Lindner III to discuss our results.

Good morning. We released our 2019 second quarter results yesterday afternoon. If you'd please turn to Slide 3 of the webcast slides for an overview. AFG reported core operating earnings of $2.12 per share, reflecting strong operating profitability and investment results in both our specialty property and casualty and annuity segments. Second quarter 2019 annualized core operating return on equity was 15%. Net earnings per share were $2.31 and included $0.48 per share and after-tax net realized gains on securities and a negative impact of $0.29 per share for annuity non-core items, including the impact of fair value accounting for fixed index annuities and other items related to changes in the stock market and interest rates. Craig and I thank God, our talented management team, and our great employees for helping to achieve these results. Based on results through the first six months of the year, we narrowed AFG’s core net operating earnings guidance for 2019 to a range of $8.40 to $8.88 per share from our previous range of $8.35 to $8.85 per share. We are maintaining our midpoint of $8.60 per share however. Craig and I will discuss our guidance for each segment of our business in more detail later in the call. Now, I’d like to turn our focus to our property and casualty operations. Please turn to slides four and five of the webcast, which include an overview of second quarter results. As you will see on Slide 4, gross written premiums were flat, net written premiums were up 1% when compared to the second quarter of 2018, primarily the result of lower crop insurance premiums. Delayed planting of spring crops resulted in late acreage reporting and reduced overall second quarter Specialty Property and Casualty premiums. It is expected though that these delayed premiums will be…

Thank you, Carl. I’ll start with a review of our annuity results for the second quarter beginning on Slide 7. Statutory annuity premiums were $1.35 billion in the second quarter of 2019, compared to $1.4 billion in the second quarter of 2018, a decrease of 4%. Higher traditional fixed annuity premiums and the financial institutions channel were more than offset by lower FIA premiums in the retail and broker dealer channels. In response to the continued drop in market interest rates in 2019, we have implemented several rate decreases in order to maintain appropriate returns on annuity sales, which has begun to temper new sales. As previously announced, in the second quarter 2019, we changed the way we define annuity core operating earnings. Beginning with the second quarter, annuity core operating earnings exclude the impact of items that are not necessarily indicative of operating trends such as the impact of fair value accounting for fixed index annuities, unlockings, and other items related to changes in the stock market and interest rates. Core operating earnings will now include an expense for the amortization of FIA option costs, which is a better measure of the cost of funds for FIAs. We believe these changes will provide investors with a better view of the fundamental performance of the business and a more comparable measure of the annuity segment's business, compared to its peers. Turning to Slide 8, you will see the components of pretax annuity core operating earnings under this new definition. Results for the periods prior to the second quarter of 2019 are shown in a comparable format to the new definition of our annuity core operating earnings and are reconciled to previously reported annuity core operating earnings. Growth in average invested assets contributed to higher year-over-year annuity earnings, which were more…

Thank you, Craig. Slide 13 summarizes AFG’s second quarter consolidated core operating earnings results. AFG reported core EPS of $2.12 in Q2 2019. Core net operating earnings in the quarter were $192 million, $7 million higher than the year ago quarter. Higher year-over-year core operating earnings in the Annuity segment, under our new definition, were offset by a lower operating earnings and our Specialty P&C insurance operations. As Craig discussed earlier in the call, AFG’s Annuity core operating earnings for the second quarter of 2019 excludes the impact of items that are not necessarily indicative of operating trends, and include an expense for the amortization of FIA option costs. We believe this better reflects the cost of funds for fixed-indexed annuities and AFG’s evaluation of the financial performance of our Annuity business. Items previously reported, as a component of Annuity core operating earnings, are noted on the slide for the comparable prior year period. Interest and other corporate expenses were $6 million lower year-over-year. Parent company interest expense increased by $1 million as compared to Q2 2018 as a result of the March 2019 issuance of $125 million principal amount hybrid 40-year, 5.875% subordinated debentures, due in 2059. Other expenses were $7 million lower year-over-year, reflecting a normal run rate in the 2019 second quarter. Slide 14 provides a reconciliation of core net operating earnings to net earnings. In the second quarter of 2019, AFG recognized $45 million or $0.48 per share in net after-tax realized gains on securities. Annuity non-core items reduced net earnings attributable to shareholders by $27 million or $0.29 per share. Turning to Slide 15, AFG’s adjusted book value per share was $58.49 as of June 30, 2019. Our annualized growth and adjusted book value per share plus dividends was a very strong 16.3% in the second quarter of 2019. We returned $170 million to our shareholders in the second quarter with the payment of our regular quarterly dividend and $1.50 per share special dividend during the quarter. Parent cash was approximately $135 million at the end of the second quarter. We maintain solid levels of capital in our insurance businesses to meet our commitments to the rating agencies. Our excess capital stood at approximate $1 billion at June 30, 2019. We plan to hold approximately $200 million to $300 million of dry powder to maintain flexibility for opportunities as they arise. Our management team reviews all opportunities for deployment of capital on a regular basis. Wrapping up, Page 16 shows a single page presentation of our updated 2019 core earnings guidance. Our guidance assumes an effective tax rate of approximately 20% on core pre-tax operating earnings. AFG’s expected 2019 core operating results exclude non-core items such as realized gains and losses, Annuity non-core earnings and other significant items that may not be indicative of ongoing operations. Now, we’d like to open the lines for any questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Amit Kumar with Buckingham Research. Your line is now open.

Thanks, and good afternoon. Just a few questions, may be starting with the Annuity piece first, did you talk about how quickly you plan to change the crediting rates based on the interest rate outlook in the opening remarks?

Hi, Amit. This is Craig.

Hi.

First of all, on – as it relates to new sales, we are constantly adjusting credited rates to earn our targeted rate of return. I think we’ve hedged some five or six adjustments so far year-to-date, and obviously with the move we’ve seen here in the last couple of days, we’re preparing to make another change as it relates to new business. As relates to the inforce, we are fortunate that we have approximately 120 basis points of difference between the current credited rates and the guaranteed minimums on approximately $30 billion of reserves. So, if we remain in this environment for an extended period of time, we have a lot of room to adjust the credited rates on inforce.

Got it. That’s helpful. The second part to I guess the same discussion is, I know in the past I think in Q4 although you’ve had interim periods, you look at the actuarial assumptions and there is sometimes noise from unlocking, is there any way to think about that right now?

Yes. Amit, typically we done the – a very, very thorough review in the fourth quarter. Given the recent move in interest rate, we're – you know we’re looking to do that in the third quarter of this year. I guess, I can't give you a prediction of the outcome, but let me tell you how I would think about it. On the negative side, clearly rates are lower than what we projected when we did the last unlocking. So, we’re going to put new assumptions in place related to future reinvestment rates and the period that it takes to get to the ultimate. So, obviously given the current level of rates, that is a negative. Now, mitigating that impact, we have the ability to reduce credit rates, and currently we will reduce credited rates beyond what was assumed in the last unlocking. And the other mitigating factor is lower interest rates drive lower option costs. So, those two items are positives. Obviously, the current level of reinvestment rates is a negative.

Got it. That’s helpful. And switching to P&C, and then, I will stop. May be let’s start with the crop insurance book. Historically, if you were to look at, you know, the previous sort of crop years, which – what would you quantify as an average year? Would that be 2014, 2015? Is there any way to sort of think about your historical crop results and how 2019 shipping up to be?

As you know, we don't separately disclose that as a segment, Amit. But you know the last couple years have been above average. This year, you know, we’re saying it’s going to be below average in the whole scheme of things. Jeff, you have any other perspective on it?

Yes.

We do. I do.

Go ahead, sorry.

No. Go ahead, Amit.

Apologies for the siren. I was trying to ask is, you know, obviously in your initial guidance, you had an average, you know, crop year, and I was just wondering if there was a close enough proxy where you could say, yes, you know, average would be 2013 or 2014, and obviously 2018 and 2017 and 2016 were maturely above expectations. I was just trying to come up with some sort of a thought process in terms of what is the closest proxy for – how you define what is an average, you know, crop year without breaking the numbers.

I’m sorry we really can't be more specific than that, but, you know, anything we gave you, Amit, would be going into information we just haven’t disclosed in the past, apologies.

Okay. The only other question is – and I’ll stop here is, on the discussion on you talking about the trends, I guess two parts. One, any thoughts on the Child Victims Act and its impact on you? And separate from that, are you seeing any sort of noise or any change in trend line from the emerging discussion on the tort climate? Thanks.

I think the – you know that’s something that we’re watching. Obviously, in our non-profit book, you know, that would be part of our business where, you know, those types of claims are things that we would watch closely. I'm not sure we’re, you know, a real heavy insurer in the state of New York itself, but of course, we can watch those trends in that. So, that’s something that, you know, we’re keeping our eye on.

And on the – separately on the tort climate, any thoughts on that overall in terms of jury awards and more returning involvement?

I think, you know, nothing new. There’s, you know, in the commercial auto side of things, you know, we continue to take pretty good rate. I think we took 9% in our commercial auto liability side. That reflects, you know, an increase in the tort environment for – you know in the commercial auto side, and I think, you know, we’re also, as far as some above average, you know, lost cost trend, the other place would be in the D&O side of things as we don't write a lot of public, so I don't think our – we’re not seeing the same trend lines as those that would write a lot of public D&O in that. I think, you know, those are – that's nothing new, you know, in our case, but there should be a few places that we would see things. And excess liability actually – you know trend – the lost cost increase there would be a little bit higher than other lines. Commercial auto, you know, when I ask our guys what's driving that, it’s commercial auto claims that are pushing up, you know, into the umbrella in excess levels.

Okay. Well, that’s very helpful. Thanks for all the answers and color and good luck for the future.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Jay Cohen with Bank of America Securities. Your line is now open.

Thank you. Yes, one just follow-up on the crop side. I guess my assumption is that the reduced premiums there because of the planting issue would have had some impact on your second quarter expense ratio, is that fair?

Jay, this is Jeff. Yes, that would be correct.

And obviously, your comments would suggest that it might reverse in the third quarter given the flow of premiums that we should see then?

Absolutely, to the extent we’re recognizing a greater level of premium in Q3, our expense ratio would tend to decline as you have a greater denominator, you're dividing it into. I would gratuitously throw in that when you look at seasonalization of our expense ratio, Jay we’ve tended to have a low expense ratio in the fourth quarter as crop profitability and contingent commissions related to that tend to come in, clearly putting down the marker that Carl has on a below-average year. You probably won't see the same reduction in expense ratio in the fourth quarter for property and transportation or across our whole business if indeed that comes to pass in our crop profitability is quote below average.

That is helpful and thank you for mentioning that. and I guess the second topic on kind of the overall the transportation businesses, you seem to suggest that you had less favorable development in this segment partly because of less favorable development or even adverse development in your transportation businesses. If you could kind of talk about the claims trends you're seeing, and then, zero-in, maybe on the placing that you're seeing in different parts of that business because it’s a big business for you now?

Jeff, you may address the reserves and I can talk a little bit about the – you know, the pricing then.

Absolutely. Jay as you mentioned, transportation is a business we like. It’s – we’ve gotten bigger and Carl just had mentioned in the call that with the Atlas’s Paratransit transaction, what we call our wheels business, which is the transportation business, could crest $1 billion growth this year. In terms of development, let's go back to our previous struggles with National Interstate, which emerged in 2012, you know, at that point we felt like, we didn't see other companies reporting the same trends. So, when we had the uptick in severity, we were concerned and we've been working on rate for seven consecutive years since then. Part of the prescription there was to increase reserves in National Interstate, which happened and then ultimately the rate has turned our combined ratio around where we feel like the transaction where we bought in the minority is giving us an appropriate return on capital. Given all the rates and given the other actions we've taken, we feel like National Interstate's in a strong reserve position at this point. And it is true that in our transportation businesses, we're showing year-over-year-lower level of favorable development when you compare Q2 of 2018 to Q2 of 2019. But we're still showing favorable development in that segment, which is a comment that I want to take many other companies in our industry can say. So, I know it's a problem spot and a hot topic with others. We certainly feel like commercial auto needs the rate that Carl cited and we are about 9% year to date. But we do have what we believe are prudently strong reserves for that business. And even though the quarterly comparison is lower 2019 versus 2018, we still are showing favorable development.

Yes. Well said, Jeff. I'm not sure I have a whole lot to add you. Overall rate increase in National Interstate is about – in the quarter was 7%, with commercial auto liability being 9%, I think Vanliner we got 3% and great American Trucking 2% overall. In National Interstate that includes some decline in workers’ comp pricing. So, I think we're pleased with the performance of our commercial auto or transportation business. We're achieving our overall combined ratio targets. Those I mentioned before with the severity trends and commercial auto liability, we're continuing to take rate there. And I think our houses are in order there and I think we're growing our business double – we're growing this transportation business double-digit through six months. I think, we've taken advantage of being – having our house in order and being in a market in a correction mode and very excited about the Atlas transaction. And expected to, as I mentioned before, to begin adding to our premiums in the second-half.

I guess, it just helps when you see trends a bit earlier than others and you move quicker. Thanks for those comments both of you. Very helpful.

Our next question comes from Greg Peters with Raymond James. Your line is now open.

Good afternoon. Carl, in your opening comments, you specifically called out the operations in Singapore, called out your aviation operations and then in financial institutions and your specialty financial segment. I was wondering if you could spend an additional minute providing some additional context on those three businesses, whether it's the type of business being written in each of those sub-segments and the order of magnitude of their effect on your second quarter results.

Yeah. Hi, Greg. FIS is still making a solid underwriting profit, just not quite as profitable at least in the first six months is what they have – were in the prior period. FIS, that business, we've achieved some rate increase, not a lot of – much rate in the first six months. I think our guys are expecting for that to move up through the rest of the year and that – but that's been a very good business for us over a long period of time. I think that they've been tougher on some of the collateral protection accounts and they've been doing a little bit of re-underwriting to try to get back to the profitability, the great profitability that we've been used to over time. On the aviation business, it's a business we started a number of years ago. We, like others in the industry, have had profitability problems in that. We've been working hard over the past 6 to 12 months to adjust our underwriting appetite and also rates. Rates in the second quarter in aviation went up 23%, they are up about 21% for the year. Right or wrong, or otherwise, we've chosen to adjust our underwriting appetite, increase rates and try to work our way through in a market that's correcting pretty well in that. So, we'll see where that goes. A little bit the same in Singapore. Singapore is a business we started, a branch we started a number of years ago. We got a pretty good start on the premium side, I think they might have been up to $50 million, $60 million. We wrote an Uber like account called [Grab] that really bit us hard and that we got off of, I think, a while ago and that market seems to be correcting, we're getting pricing in Singapore of about 7% right now. So, very similar, we've been taking underwriting actions, as well as increasing price in Singapore, in order to correct the results.

As a follow-up…

Hi, Greg, this is Jeff. You had said in your question, you're hoping for some quantification, just a couple of notes I would make to put some numbers around Carl's commentary. With respect to the financial institutions business or FIS, that's in our Specialty Financial segment, it is a major component there, it's the biggest by premium and just to echo Carl's comment, it's a good business, it's operating at combined ratio below 90. So, very appropriate and good margins. With respect to Aviation, we've talked for several quarters in a row, including last year about the severity and the loss trends that's brought about. I would not single out aviation in the second quarter of 2019 as contributing any variance to our combined ratio in the quarter as compared to last year. Their margins, in terms of dollars, are roughly comparable, actually materially better. And then Singapore, which is in property and transportation, you'll note that our Property and Transportation sub segment, accident year combined ratio rose by about 1.7, 1.8 points in the quarter. Singapore is the major contributor to that. So that would be driving the uptick in that sub-segment.

As a follow-up. On the aviation account, where you're reporting substantial rate, is that a general aviation type business, or is there some commercial and other aspects included?

That’s what we would call kind of more of a non-standard general aviation type of a book, that – that's our niche. It's not the commercial – large commercial airline concern.

Got it. Thank you for those answers. Craig, I'd like to ask you a question or two about your segment and your results. I was looking through Page 15 of your supplement and listening about your comments on pressure on sales. And it looks like you've seen the most pressure on new sales in the broker dealer single-digit or single premium indexed annuity business, not as much in the financial institutions piece. Do you think your market actions are going to bleed over and lead to a decline in that larger piece of your new sales?

Greg, time will tell, it really depends upon what our competitors do in terms of adjusting credited rates. We've been surprised that some of the competition has been as slow as they've been to adjust credited rates, but it really is going to be a function of whether our competitors are interested in earning the appropriate rate of return or whether they're going to accept returns that we would not.

Right. As a follow-up, you commented about the opportunity to reduce crediting rates. It seems, in some respects, there is some headwind in your annuity business as we look beyond this year, look to 2020 and I guess my question and I know you're not going to provide guidance on 2020 numbers yet, but is the annuity business in this current environment, especially what's transpired in say the last month or two, should we still think about the annuity business as a growth business for AFG or is it possible that it may stagnate for the year?

And I don't know quite sure what you mean by stagnate. First of all, we're going to price our product to earn the right rate of return. That's one of the beauties of being involved in a highly diversified company where if the environment in one line of business really isn't conducive to earning rate returns or investing more capital, we have the ability to kind of weight things at that given line of business until conditions change and they always do. So, you saw our guidance on premium is being down 5% to 10%, but it still drives growth in the guidance on growth in reserves and investments is 9% to 11%. So, still very healthy growth in reserves and investments. I wouldn't call that stagnant, there may be periods when premiums decline, we're okay with that, we're going to be disciplined with our pricing. But the guided level of premiums still generates a very healthy growth in investments and reserves.

Well, I don't want to give you the wrong impression. I guess, when I was – what I'm looking at would be on Slide 10 in your annuity outlook, where you talk about the core earnings, the guidance that you provided for the year. And when I – I'm just trying to get a sense is that the opportunity with the credit union rates that will help lead to and the growth in your investments lead to growth in the pre-tax earnings, as reported for 2020, or are the market conditions such that it's possible that it might not grow next year?

We have not given guidance, Greg, on next year yet. But we feel pretty confident we're going to continue to earn attractive returns in the annuity business. I'll just say that.

Yes, got it. Thanks.

Our next question comes from Paul Newsome with Sandler O'Neill. Your line is now open.

First, I have what I think is a bit of an accounting question. So, Jeff said that the premium recognition in the crop business wouldn't change due to the slow planting. I was wondering if there is something about your business of your accounting that might be different – geographic trends or whatever that would create a difference in accounting from a premium perspective?

It's an interesting question, Paul. Unfortunately, we're not in a position to comment on accounting policies. So, I think that you can take Carl's guidance about the recording of premium and the timing as reflective of our business and how it's accounted for and I can't really stray off of that territory.

Okay, fair enough. And then, could we hone a little bit in on the workers' comp business. I think you said the profits were actually up. Pricing has been widely talked about as being down for just about everybody. So, I guess that either means, you're expanding your workers comp business quite a bit of our premium perspective or you're remarkably having negative clean inflation. Maybe you could just talk about sort of how that is holding up, as well as it is?

Yes. Workers comp will probably be a little under 19% of our overall direct written premium projected for this year. Our six month results overall for this year are very good. We have a healthy accident year combined ratio and a very healthy calendar year combined. The outlook, I think, is the same for the whole year. Overall, gross and net written premiums have been down a little for six months. And I think they'd probably be down low-single digit for the 2019 year. As I think we've said before, we look at parts of our, I mean, from a loss cost trend standpoint, very pleased with what we're seeing on the loss cost trend side. Our overall loss or loss cost trend at Summit is about up 1%, republics is pretty flat, strategic comp is, not much going on there, so loss cost inflation, we're very pleased with it. So very pleased with the overall results. Republic as to be expected after the adjustments in rates, including current pricing being down 11%. I think for six months and for the whole year, we'll probably have a small underwriting accident year underwriting loss at Republic, so we're continuing because of the strong reserve position to have a small underwriting gain to probably breakeven results on the combined ratio for Republic. Again, keep in mind that, we're earning 20% returns on equity even at 100% combined ratio in California. Summit continues to do very well. I'd expect Summit to make a small accident year underwriting profit, a healthy calendar year underwriting profit even with price being down 11%, premiums will be down 2% to 4%, feel good about the reserve position in that part of our business. And so, I mentioned for strategic comp has very healthy accident year and calendar year profit for six months and is projected this year, they are actually growing in that part of our large deductible kind of part of our business and actually getting a little bit of rate increase through the first six months. So, I'm – we're very pleased with our workers' comp business right now.

Great. Thank you very much.

Our next question comes from Christopher Campbell with KBW. Your line is now open.

Yes. Hi, good afternoon. If the expense ratios were up in all three segments and it sounds like Property and Transportation might be a little bit of crop-related, but what's driving the higher expenses in the other two segments?

Hi, Chris, it’s Jeff Consolino. So, overall, I would say, our expense ratio is up, but only modestly. I can throw some numbers at you. I'll try to dissect that by sub segment. I just want to lay the hands on the right analysis here. We talked about Property and Transportation subsegment and the impact crop was having in the current quarter. In our Specialty Casualty segment, our expense ratio has moved up by about eight-tenths of a point. The major contributor there, we have a number of longer-tail casualty operations there. And there – in some cases, retaining more of their premium and buying less reinsurance. Since they're so profitable when they do buy reinsurance, they get a very healthy seeding commission and so the act of buying lesser reinsurance, let's just keep more underwriting profit, but kind of counter intuitively would tend to tick up the expense ratio if the seeding commission is in excess of our original acquisition cost, that's what's contributing to what's going on within the Specialty Casualty segment. We talked earlier in response to a different question about our financial institutions business inside the Specialty Financial sub segment that financial institutions business is the biggest piece of that. We've talked about the nature of that business in past calls, where there is a, what I would characterize as a variable commission for our production sources there, profit commission that if we have very little loss ratios, the originating agents can receive higher commissions. In 2018, with an active CAT year, profit commissions were lower for our financial institutions business. This year in a more normal CAT environment and we're back to paying a more normal level of profit commission. So, that's why you'd see the expense ratio moving up in that segment by about 1.6 points, but you really wouldn't see a concomitant increase in the accident year combined ratio because it's somewhat offset by a lower loss ratio in the sub-segment.

Okay, great. Thanks for that color. Specialty Casualty reserve releases were up year-over-year. I guess what products in accident years are contributing to those?

Workers compensation is the biggest piece, Chris. And accident years, generally it’s going back three, four even more years when you look at the accident years, these are emanating from.

So, like [2016] and prior?

If you go back 2016 and prior, that's more than 100% of the reserve release.

Okay, got it. Big picture question, I guess, what would be AFG's potential liability exposure to opioid distributors and manufacturers, do you guys have any exposure there?

Give me a second here, I don't have any notes on that. No, I don't think that's a – I don't think that's a big area of concern for us. We just don't – we're not a large insurer of chemical, pharmaceutical, manufacturing companies and those types of risks. So, obviously, something that we're keeping our eye on in that, but I wouldn't say that.

Okay, got it. And then, no repurchases this quarter, I guess how should we think about modeling those going forward given the recent pullback in the shares?

We did just pay $1.50 special dividend, which was a substantial commitment of our capital. Our CEOs and our board are very focused on returning capital to shareholders in the most appropriate way, if we can deploy it growing organically or making sensible acquisitions. I think our actions have demonstrated a recent bias towards special dividends, rather than repurchases. But it's all subject to the financial analysis at a point-in-time.

Got it. And then, I guess how fast is the excess capital growing because I mean if you’re pulling back in life, right, if there’s going to be less life premium growth, that’s obviously – there is – you know that’s – you know a guy in terms of excess capital, but then, you’re growing P&C, which you’ll need capital there to grow. I guess just combining those two, how should we think about, you know, excess capital generation, you know, overtime in modeling that?

Chris, we did report $1 billion of excess capital with this earnings release. So, even after paying that substantial dividend, we've built ourselves back up because we started the quarter at where we ended previous quarter in $1.1 billion before that special dividend. We've said over time, I think, Craig, is pleased with the annuity business being a generator of excess capital rather than consumer of excess capital. With the P&C business, our after-tax returns are north of 15%, if you look back at the most recent year and we're not growing organically at 15%. So, unless we find a way to reinvest that and things like the paratransit transaction or the ABAIS transaction, P&C will continue to generate excess capital for us. We've got good flexibility and ideally, we'll have the opportunity to deploy it in a sensible way and if not, we'll be returning to shareholders.

Okay, very well. Thanks for the color and best of luck in the third quarter.

At this time, I’m showing no further questions, I would like to turn the call back over to Diane for any closing remarks.

Thank you all for joining us this morning, and we look forward to talking with you again when we release next quarter’s results.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today’s conference. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.