So, the insurance black box monitors are here

Not installing this even if they say my insurance will drop 50%. This will completely kill the riding experience as ill feel like im being watched 24-7. Even if youre not doing anything illegal (which by definition, youre hard pressed to find anyone like that since even doing 120 is technically illegal and you can bet the insurance companies will use that against you), you dont want to be constantly supervised do you? I just hope if they even make it mandatory, the mods come out quickly because this is another push for many to start riding without insurance. We already pay out of our noses and this is not going to be pushed on people.
 
It would be funny if the people who have the fewest accidents are the ones who drive assertively by accelerating quickly and stopping quickly as opposed to the zombies for whom driving is distraction getting in the way of their texting.
 
aircav said:
It would be funny if the people who have the fewest accidents are the ones who drive assertively by accelerating quickly and stopping quickly as opposed to the zombies for whom driving is distraction getting in the way of their texting.
Click to expand...

Interesting point.
 
RockerGuy said:
Since you're in the business I seriously thought your opinion would be otherwise
Click to expand...

well most of your thoughts serious or otherwise are wrong! just think of anything you do, would you like it full time monitored or would you like the benefit of the doubt. everyone thinks they are the best driver, rider, pick up artist, dresser, dancer , sex...etc...but if you saw a video and or computer printout of how you really are you would kill yourself probably.
 
Its hard to trust someone who has been abusing you for several years. Good intentions or not
 
RockerGuy said:
Its hard to trust someone who has been abusing you for several years. Good intentions or not
Click to expand...

Don't be fooled. There's no good intentions of insurance companies other than to make themselves richer. This is just another shot at doing it.
 
Dresden said:
You're assuming they are basing their data on a sample size of you.

Doubt it.
Click to expand...

13km / second = 39 kph over 3 seconds.

Average 1L SS gets to 100kph in 3 seconds

You are now allowed to accelerate at 7.7 seconds to 100km.

No point having an SS if this comes into wider effect.

BTW "the Grand Caravan’s acceleration numbers are somewhere between ho and hum: 7.9 seconds to 60, 16.2 seconds at 86 mph in the quarter." - http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-dodge-grand-caravan-r-t-road-test-review

Might as well get an e-bike if you're gonna get the black box!


What happens if you ride like a saint on the road, then ride with the black box on the track? Will they count that against you?
 
Last edited:
ashkan said:
Not installing this even if they say my insurance will drop 50%. This will completely kill the riding experience as ill feel like im being watched 24-7. Even if youre not doing anything illegal (which by definition, youre hard pressed to find anyone like that since even doing 120 is technically illegal and you can bet the insurance companies will use that against you), you dont want to be constantly supervised do you? I just hope if they even make it mandatory, the mods come out quickly because this is another push for many to start riding without insurance. We already pay out of our noses and this is not going to be pushed on people.
Click to expand...

Ashkan.....The idea of God watching over me 100% of the time is about as much as I can take....and I haven't seen any punishment for speeding in any holy texts. I can only imagine how this monitoring irks you! Hahhaha.

Oh and you know that black box data will be sent to the companies real time, and be subject to government surveilance or hacking.
 
Sunspark said:
Papers meant actual paper from the company. It's at the office. Didn't mean newspaper article.

And yes, it could be a sample size of 1. Why not? Computers can track it all. It's a wonder the 407 doesn't just automatically mail people tickets for driving at an average speed of 101 km/hr since they have a computerized tick of when people enter and a tock of when they exit. They probably calculated they'd lose more revenue if people stayed away than what the provincial treasury would gain.
Click to expand...

Average speed cameras operate in the UK. They already do this there. They use it over 100km distance in key areas on motorways. You should see what happens when you accidently go over 60mph then have to deliberately slow down to average it out....creates havoc and phantom jams! Only way to drive is actually lower at 55mph and never go over 60mph. Effictively means no passing, again further slowing things down cause it becomes difficult to move over lanes unless you slow down (even in the fast lane) to let people in the slower lanes pass you!!! This slows down others behind you and they fear accelerating to make up the slow down, so again, just slows it down even further!
 
7up said:
I am amazed at the amount of people who truly think that insurance companies are going to give you a discount after the price you are willing to pay has already been determined. Soon your cell phone will be able to give you a break on life insurance unless it detects you are consuming too much coffee or beer (mobile payment + GPS locator), or its acceleraometer determines you to be a risk taker.
Click to expand...

corrected
 
I don't mind putting the box in my car. It goes on average 2000K a year to work and back. My wifes car or my bike? No way. 1st check on the bike and I loose my license :)
 
awyala said:
Ashkan.....The idea of God watching over me 100% of the time is about as much as I can take....and I haven't seen any punishment for speeding in any holy texts. I can only imagine how this monitoring irks you! Hahhaha.

Oh and you know that black box data will be sent to the companies real time, and be subject to government surveilance or hacking.
Click to expand...
Lol As an atheist, i trust god more than i trust these insurance companies. And with the NSA revelations, i wouldnt want them to know any more about me than they already do. Although im sure they are monitoring even this message as i type lol
 
Roomie said:
Don't be fooled. There's no good intentions of insurance companies other than to make themselves richer. This is just another shot at doing it.
Click to expand...


A business wants to make themselves richer???? Whoa whoa whoa whoa WHOA.....when did that happen????????..
 
sonnythebull said:
A business wants to make themselves richer???? Whoa whoa whoa whoa WHOA.....when did that happen????????..
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was shocking. I said anyone thinking they're doing this for the goodness of their customers is clearly nuts. There will be no good come of this for clients.
 
Roomie said:
I didn't say it was shocking. I said anyone thinking they're doing this for the goodness of their customers is clearly nuts. There will be no good come of this for clients.
Click to expand...

To be clear, this is indeed a method to make an insurance company more profits, but not by means of taking in more premium. If we collected $1B in premiums for our in-force clients before the devices, we will continue to collect $1B in premium for in-force clients after the devices. The difference is in how that $1B is distributed based on risk factors -- charge less to good risks, and more to bad risks.

Where we would make more profit is by offering lower premiums to better clients, so that we can steal profitable clients from our competitors. More profitable clients on the books translates to more profit for us. Also, if our competitors aren't selecting the best of clients by using the devices, then they will inevitably attract unprofitable clients because they charge the same rate for crappy risks and good risks. A good example of this is State Farm who doesn't segment motorcycles by Sport and non-Sport . . . guess where all the Sport riders go?

So, you are correct that insurance companies aren't doing this out of kindness of their heart, but it doesn't translate to average premium increases.
 
aircav said:
It would be funny if the people who have the fewest accidents are the ones who drive assertively by accelerating quickly and stopping quickly as opposed to the zombies for whom driving is distraction getting in the way of their texting.
Click to expand...

Yes, it will be interesting to see how driving characteristics translates to claims. It could very well be the case that people who speed by about 20% are the best risks out there. I actually wouldn't be surprised if that is the result. Without seeing any data, my initial guess is that risk decreases as your average speed is between 0-20% over the speed limit, and then your risk increases for 20%+ over the speed limit.
 
VifferFun said:
To be clear, this is indeed a method to make an insurance company more profits, but not by means of taking in more premium. If we collected $1B in premiums for our in-force clients before the devices, we will continue to collect $1B in premium for in-force clients after the devices. The difference is in how that $1B is distributed based on risk factors -- charge less to good risks, and more to bad risks.

Where we would make more profit is by offering lower premiums to better clients, so that we can steal profitable clients from our competitors. More profitable clients on the books translates to more profit for us. Also, if our competitors aren't selecting the best of clients by using the devices, then they will inevitably attract unprofitable clients because they charge the same rate for crappy risks and good risks. A good example of this is State Farm who doesn't segment motorcycles by Sport and non-Sport . . . guess where all the Sport riders go?

So, you are correct that insurance companies aren't doing this out of kindness of their heart, but it doesn't translate to average premium increases.
Click to expand...

Actually kingsway/ Jevco built a massive profitable business on sub par auto risks. The facts are the people who drive the best are the ones paying the most and on their last chance before facility and or unaffordable insurance. They drive better, pay more , have higher deductibles and never put in claims unless they absolutely have to because they know one more slip up and they are screwed...The so called " good drivers or good risks" are the ones waiting to have the biggest claims, not frequent claims but big ones when they do. And they carry low deductibles and put in every nickle and dime claim if they can.
 
sonnythebull said:
Actually kingsway/ Jevco built a massive profitable business on sub par auto risks. The facts are the people who drive the best are the ones paying the most and on their last chance before facility and or unaffordable insurance. They drive better, pay more , have higher deductibles and never put in claims unless they absolutely have to because they know one more slip up and they are screwed...The so called " good drivers or good risks" are the ones waiting to have the biggest claims, not frequent claims but big ones when they do. And they carry low deductibles and put in every nickle and dime claim if they can.
Click to expand...

I guess I wasn't really clear -- insurance companies make money by charging the most *accurate* premiums relative to expected future claims. You can certainly make money on a sub-par risk as long as it's priced appropriately. If a group is likely to claim $2000 on average over the next year, we can still make money by charging them about $2000 each. On the other hand, if a group is likely to claim $1000 on average over the next year, we will lose all of their business (and profits) to competitors if we try to charge $2000 each.

In short, an insurer with inaccurate rates will attract groups with high expected claims, and repel groups with low expected claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom