They’re spending a lot of time with data analytics, better insight to help our primary clients figure out their positioning. But the endgame, I think when you think through the 1/1 renewals is that there’s more risk, more volatility has been pushed to the primary insurers. And the outcome of that for them will be either risk appetite. They’re going to have to be very disciplined on the risk that they assume in the property space in particular. They’ll use other methods like facultative reinsurance, they’ll probably do selective buying throughout the year. And so I would say the 1/1 season, a little different than years past which I think is what you’re alluding to. And ultimately, they’re going to continue to manage their portfolio as the year progresses.
Greg Case: And I might just add to that, at least, the theme was exceptional. I’d tell you, the 1/1 renewals had a unique market dynamic and taking the analytics and capability we have in place and what we’re able to do and how we deliver it to the market well before anyone else was truly unique and helped our clients tremendously as they navigated through the marketplace. As Eric highlighted, more risk means more opportunity to demonstrate value added.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Andrew Kligerman with Credit Suisse.
Andrew Kligerman: In your slides, you described the impact on organic revenues from the market as modest positive impact in both commercial risk and reinsurance. Can you give a little more color on that market impact and maybe discuss the issue of commissions versus fees and whether your fees were kind of level year-over-year or whether commissions were driven down in each of those 2 segments?
Greg Case: Andrew, maybe I’ll start and Eric, you can chime in as well here. First, Andrew, we always come back to the idea we talk about market impact. This is a function of prices you’re highlighting but also insured values over time. Obviously, a lot is happening on the insured value front. And this is really broadly beyond this property but really as you think about on the employee side and all aspects of sort of what’s driven by changes in those values. And that actually has much more impact than just price per se. As we’ve highlighted, you step back, it really is a modest impact over time. We saw that in this quarter. We think we’ll see that throughout the year. And it really for us is about value. We deliver value for clients and we could benefit from that because they get benefit.
And we’re very, very clear about that. And as Eric highlighted on Elyse’s question, in an environment with greater risk, the opportunity to provide greater value is real and meaningful and we’re doing it and we’re benefiting from it. So that’s what you’re seeing overall. But Eric, maybe you want to dive a bit more into the specific pricing.
Eric Andersen: Sure. Listen, I think on the property on the market perspective, certainly property is getting a lot of attention and you continue to see that market be challenging for our primary clients. It is worth noting though that clients use a lot of different tools to manage that market dynamic. They use captives, they use retention. They limits purchase. So it’s not a direct line from what a carrier would say about a property market rate versus what a client actually assume. So there’s a lot of tools that they have and we spend an awful lot of time, as Greg was saying, trying to add additional value for them using financial modeling and techniques to try and limit that exposure. The other products, casualty, cyber, financial products, etcetera, around the globe, I would say, are more stable.
