Darrin Bedol's Profile

whoops meant to leave the below as a new comment 🙂

This is a super interesting topic and the first I have read about reinsurance companies (though it of course makes sense they exist). I would push back on one point you make, which is that as prices increase fewer companies will purchase the insurance or have the ability to do so. I would argue that, given the increasing rate of natural disasters, prices and the instances of people purchasing natural disaster insurance will increase and insurance companies will have greater purchasing power. Additionally, I imagine that demand from the insurance companies is fairly inelastic. The cost of taking on the risk themselves is too high and thus the insurance companies will always be willing to pay for reinsurance. I think Munich Re has positioned itself very well to be the leader in what will be an increasingly important industry.

This is a super interesting topic and the first I have read about reinsurance companies (though it of course makes sense they exist). I would push back on one point you make, which is that as prices increase fewer companies will purchase the insurance or have the ability to do so. I would argue that, given the increasing rate of natural disasters, prices and the instances of people purchasing natural disaster insurance will increase and insurance companies will have greater purchasing power. Additionally, I imagine that demand from the insurance companies is fairly inelastic. The cost of taking on the risk themselves is too high and thus the insurance companies will always be willing to pay for reinsurance. I think Munich Re has positioned itself very well to be the leader in what will be an increasingly important industry.

Super interesting topic about our great rival, Canada. I wonder if, given that Canada has a strong dairy farming union and is of tertiary importance to most U.S. dairy farmers, Cayuga is better off focusing its sales on China, Saudi Arabia, and other countries that may not have dairy farming infrastructures. As Cayuga, I don’t want to be involved in political drama with Canada; I want to sell milk. Additionally, because Cayuga’s main product is powdered milk (thus easier to ship and has a long shelf life) it seems like a more global expansion is a logical next step and poses less risks in the short term. However, this strategy would come with its own geopolitical concern given that relationships with both China and the middle east can be fraught and unpredictable.

Agree that this is a super interesting topic! As Gildan I would be concerned about the costs of making bets on uncertain outcomes – especially given the volatility of the current administration. While I like the acquisition of American Apparel, I also worry about making heavy investments in US manufacturing while still maintaining the ability to deliver at the absolutely lowest cost. As Gildan, I would pay close attention to the moves of the industry in general and see how others – even in different industries – are reacting.

To react to your last question, I think it is unrealistic for Gildan to completely vertically integrate in each of its customer markets and still remain the lowest cost player. If the US is Gildan’s priority, then their strategy of ramping up US production seems to be the right one. However, if they want to remain a global player, they need to figure out the right mix of ramping up US production and maintaining production facilities in low cost centers around the world.

While REI’s sustainability practices are admirable, similar to Ryu, I wonder what they are doing (if anything) to ensure that their suppliers and SKUs are produced in sustainable factories or by sustainable brands. For example, REI carries brands like Patagonia (known for sustainability). Under Armour, and Nike, over whom they likely have very little influence. However, for some smaller brands, REI may have the opportunity to spread their sustainability practices and enforce stricter standards on the products they will carry.

I imagine this problem is pervasive for any retail distributor who focuses on sustainability. While the effort of the distributor is admirable, it is hard to separate fully their own practices from those of the brands they carry in-store.

I echo many of the questions you raise regarding the cost implications of developing a new enterprise traceability solution. While there will be cost benefits to ABC from staying ahead of the curve and not having to adapt to new regulations, I also worry how the costs of developing this solution will impact the bottom line of ABC. I like your suggestion that they generate revenue and sell the solution to other companies, however, I worry about the shifted focus and salesforce it would require to sell a technology solution. Similar to their partnership with Suzuken, ABC could partner with a technology company and outsource this revenue stream, rather than directly overseeing the sales of a technology product.

This provided a lot of useful information on a topic I know little about. The last paragraph covers what my main concern would be: adoption. While I undoubtedly see the benefit to construction companies, I am concerned about convincing subcontractors to adapt the same technology. In particular, I would worry that subcontractors do not want to pay for a service because a) it is expensive and b) working over schedule and budget may benefit the subcontractors. You also mention that subcontractors can now be reached via BIM instead of phone, but I see a need to continue investing in subcontractor relationships as strong interpersonal relationships seem vital to the industry. That being said, construction is such a capital-intensive yet old school industry that it seems rife for disruption and optimization using digitization.