IBJNews

CNO Financial boosts fourth-quarter profit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

CNO Financial Group's fourth-quarter profit rose 57 percent compared with the same period in the previous year, the company announced late Monday.

The Carmel-based holding company for insurance firms reported fourth-quarter 2012 net income of $101.2 million, or 41 cents a share. It posted profit of $64.4 million, or 23 cents per share, for the same period in 2011. For the full year, the company recorded net income of $221 million, or 83 cents per share, as compared with $335.7 million and $1.15 per share in 2011.

CNO’s net operating income of 25 cents per share exceeded a consensus analyst estimate of 23 cents compiled by Zacks Equity Research. That compares with 2011 net operating income of 18 cents a share.

“We again delivered positive results with strong earnings growth for both the fourth quarter and full year, as our business continued to perform well,” said CEO Ed Bonach.

The parent of Bankers Life, Washington National and Colonial Penn said total revenue hit $1.06 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012, an increase over $1.05 billion in the same quarter of 2011.

CNO cited a number of business upturns. Sales as measured by new annualized premiums rose 2 percent in the quarter, to $105.7 million. Bonach also was pleased with a sales force expansion under way.

The company strengthened its financial position last year by restructuring debt. It also has been repurchasing its stock, and in 2013 is expected to spend up to $300 million in additional share buybacks and dividend payouts.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT