@HSP, This is largely a non-event. NIB have a long-demonstrated...

@HSP,

This is largely a non-event.

NIB have a long-demonstrated track record of not only operating within the letter of the law, but also within the spirit of the law.

One small oversight (and it is small, involving a mere few hundred clients, and not all of them are necessarily out of pocket because of it) does not constitute systematic malfeasance.

The damage to the brand will be negligible (most NIB policyholders wouldn't even be aware of this incident given its limited scale) and I expect the financial penalties - of any - will be measured in single millions of dollars, at most.

In fact, given the hundreds of clauses contained in thousands of contracts involving tens of thousands of different clients, I am surprised NIB hasn't made even more mistakes like this one.

The problem for NHF is not this issue (which is more headline-grabbing than anything else). Rather, the problem is that the stock was fundamentally expensive to begin with at a price level in the low-$6.00's.

The stock has gone from being signficantly overvalued (at ~22x P/E) to now being merely mildly overvalued (@18x P/E)