3 ms·

In my case Lemonade was by far the cheapest option for renters insurance - even cheaper than bundeling with my auto insurance. Glad to see the company is doing

In my case Lemonade was by far the cheapest option for renters insurance - even cheaper than bundeling with my auto insurance. Glad to see the company is doing well. I suppose it's greatest risk is incumbents offering more aggressive bundle pricing. So It'd be interesting to see if Lemonade could expand into the auto insurance sphere. Actually from the S1: > in February 2020, we announced our intention to launch pet insurance, and we may in the future choose to enter, as underwriter or as agent, into additional vertical markets, such as auto and life insurance, in order to achieve our long-term growth goals. It sounds like they will enter other insurance markets provided the regulations aren't too costly.

stevehawk 6y ago
you say "doing well" but their filing says "we lose money annually".
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
servercobra 6y ago
They were cheaper for me until I realized they don't cover earthquakes, and then they became much more expensive than bundling with USAA sadly. I'd definitely be interested in them for most types of insurances though. They're super easy to use and importantly, super easy to cancel.
- bcrosby95 6y ago
  I don't know how it is for renters, but you can't find a standard homeowners insurance that will cover earthquakes, at least not in California. This occurred after the damages and insurance claims from the Northridge earthquake. You have to buy earthquake insurance through a state program that the insurance company may offer - but it isn't really from the company, its from the state. In general, they are extremely high deductible programs and only for catastrophic loss - e.g. deductibles that are 25% of the structure.
  - 0xffff2 6y ago
    I don't know about other insurers, but USAA's renter's insurance covers earthquakes. Also, I just got a quote from Lemonade and they have an option to add earthquake coverage via a third party. I think the difference is that renter's insurance isn't covering damage to the building. They're only covering damage to your stuff if it gets buried underneath the building.
    - adeelk93 6y ago
      "Walls in" is what such a policy would be referred to as

stevehawk 6y ago

you say "doing well" but their filing says "we lose money annually".

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

servercobra 6y ago

They were cheaper for me until I realized they don't cover earthquakes, and then they became much more expensive than bundling with USAA sadly. I'd definitely be interested in them for most types of insurances though. They're super easy to use and importantly, super easy to cancel.

bcrosby95 6y ago
I don't know how it is for renters, but you can't find a standard homeowners insurance that will cover earthquakes, at least not in California. This occurred after the damages and insurance claims from the Northridge earthquake. You have to buy earthquake insurance through a state program that the insurance company may offer - but it isn't really from the company, its from the state. In general, they are extremely high deductible programs and only for catastrophic loss - e.g. deductibles that are 25% of the structure.
- 0xffff2 6y ago
  I don't know about other insurers, but USAA's renter's insurance covers earthquakes. Also, I just got a quote from Lemonade and they have an option to add earthquake coverage via a third party. I think the difference is that renter's insurance isn't covering damage to the building. They're only covering damage to your stuff if it gets buried underneath the building.
  - adeelk93 6y ago
    "Walls in" is what such a policy would be referred to as