Insurance on the bayou, that is. Here’s a story of mine largely featuring an interview with Louisiana’s deputy insurance commissioner.

Exciting!

Here’s a story I filed yesterday about an insurance conference on discrimination that I attended with my dad.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the ads for Progressive Insurance Co. targeted at teens, but they (of course) accompanied by a Web site.

It’s actually a very good site, with lots of helpful information about auto insurance, coverage quizzes and other interesting stuff. Well, interesting to an insurance geek like me, anyway.

Originally, I found the ads puzzling. After all, most teen-agers are insured through their parents’ policy, where they get better rates. And auto insurance is not exactly the kind of things kids see as a status symbol (“Oh, mah Gawd! I cannot believe she is insured with State Farm. What was she thinking?!”).

But Progressive knows that very few teens who explore their site will actually wind up buying insurance from then, at least now. What they are doing is trying to explain the basics and help teens figure it out for themselves. The site even talks about the pros and cons of going solo.

So, even if this target market cannot afford Progressive now, it’s a name they’ll know and perhaps look to get a quote from three or four years down they line after they’re finishing up college. At least, that’s how a Progressive rep. explained it to me yesterday.

I have no idea whether it will work or not, but it’s another example of Progressive’s thinking outside the proverbial box. As the kids might say, “Kewl.” (Yes, I know I’m only 25 years old.)

The only danger will be if the anti-tobacco folks might start persecuting Progressive for pursuing the teen target market. “Look at all the kids you’ve hooked on insurance!” I could imagine them howling on “Nightline.”

An abbreviated version of a story I wrote for Insurance Journal about agency co-ops, or clusters, is now online.

Enjoy!

I just finished a 2,000-word story on the California homeowners insurance market. May you never have to write a 2,000-word story on the California homeowners insurance market.

Not that I don’t love it!

After Sept. 11, the insurance industry (with some help from the construction industry) begged and pleaded for a federal backstop for terrorism insurance. Eventually, they got it good and hard.

And now, nobody’s buying it! Coverages are still scattershot and what is offered is too expensive.

The folks who might want it (big buildings in major cities) are charged premiums they don’t want to pay, and the folks who’d get great rates (smaller businesses in less dense areas) don’t see any need for it.

Sounds like the situation before Congress passed the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. The only difference is that now, if there is a terrorist attack, taxpayers will be left with the bill for anything over $10 billion — assuming the target’s owner has purchased terrorism coverage to begin with.

I’ve just uploaded two new stories for InsuranceJournal.com: one on Near North and a talk with Kansas’ insurance commissioner.

I’m really happy with the Near North story. Considering my conflict of interest (having previously worked for AIP), I thought I did a pretty good job being fair about it. You might disagree.

UPDATE: I just spotted these stories form the March 10 South Central issue online. Here’s a recap of earlier Segal/Near North developments, and a feature on marine insurance — more specifically (I know, you were thinking, “I need more specifics!”), passenger and gaming vessels. Woo-hoo!

In case you’re curious about the latest insurance legislative developments, here’s the result of my sojourn to Springfield last week.