It’s a pretty interesting paper. Are CAT bonds a form of insurance or a financial product?
The holders make no promise to assume additional risk. The product is more freely transferable than insurance. What’s more, CATs can’t be bifurcated, which, they feel, further supports that they’re a financial instrument rather than insurance.
What is she even saying?
I don’t know.
I disagree with the part about not using a fork though.
If she uses chopsticks she’s sure to draw all sorts of comments.