4 ms·

Fair point about the bins and a "data driven approach" to premiums. But I think you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit pr

Fair point about the bins and a "data driven approach" to premiums. But I think you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit privacy. Most auto-insurance trackers are currently offering discounts "of up to 15%" if you qualify as a "good driver". Seriously, that's like what $40 on a typical 6 month policy? And you have to drive perfectly at all times, no speeding ever, no rapid acceleration, no sudden stops, etc. All of that is being tracked. And you most definitely cannot get in an accident at all. Even with your good driving habits, you are still subject to randomness equally on the road at any given point in time. Your demographics and "bins" aren't going to make the roll-of-the-dice any different for you. Driving is a random series of events and you can be caught in a situation that is your fault (legally) just the same as anyone else on the road. This move is nothing more than a company trying to make extra money by selling your private data. It's the new business model of the information age, and all traditional companies are looking at new ways to extort your privacy for the sake of profit.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
> But I think you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit privacy. Most auto-insurance trackers are currently offering discounts "of up to 15%" if you qualify as a "good driver". Seriously, that's like what $40 on a typical 6 month policy? And you have to drive perfectly at all times, no speeding ever, no rapid acceleration, no sudden stops, etc. All of that is being tracked. And you most definitely cannot get in an accident at all. This all seems like conjecture. The auto insurance market is pretty competitive, and if an insurance company misprices their insurance, there are plenty of other insurance companies out there that will correct it.
gowld 6y ago
If insurance companies just wanted to raise rates, they already would have.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure the state insurance commissions have something to say about that, too.
perl4ever 6y ago
>Seriously, that's like what $40 on a typical 6 month policy? Interesting that you think car insurance costs around $500/year. Claims that people pay close to triple that on average seem to be abundant. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/car-insurance/average-cost-of-car-insurance https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/car-insurance/average-co...
- taftster 6y ago
  OK, fair to call that out. My bad for grabbing numbers from my arse. So let's take the average, which per your source, says $1400 / year (or $700 per 6-months). $700 * 0.15 = $105 savings per 6 months ($17.50 per month). So now you need to ask, will you qualify for the full 15% discount? If you stop too quickly or roll through a benign stop sign, you can forget it. And worse, don't you think that the insurance company in question already raised their rates by 15% only to give you a chance to earn that back with (quote) "good driving habits"? If they ding you for anything, then you're going to pay the higher rate. It's like a grocery store member card. If you don't have it, they just don't care, they just charge you the non-member price. But their member price is already profitable, so the few shoppers coming through and buying without a membership are just paying an additional gravy to their profits. Insurance companies want to get into this game, desperately. Oh, you don't have their tracker app installed? Well, you're going to pay the non-premium expensive rate and they get the keep the profit. Your good driving is not going to offset your demographic either. And then there's all the privacy concerns. No thanks, I'm going to opt out and not buy into the $18 per month non-discount with some gimmicky insurance company and instead give my business to a company that doesn't want to play premium discount games.
asdff 6y ago
>Driving is a random series of events and you can be caught in a situation that is your fault (legally) just the same as anyone else on the road. This is true, and that's why you pay more for car insurance in Los Angeles than in the desert. There is a base rate for the given area that everyone pays premium to, given the danger of a given square foot of road is different for every area. This is already all quantified and baked in, even driving habits from indirect sources like google maps or road conditions, so personal data collection will not change this. So why data collect at all if so much variance is due to local danger? Because a huge component of the variance is also explained by drivers skill, and insurers proxy this based on correlations from your demographic data, since they lack any other datapoint on your particular driving habits (other than accident history). This is why powerful sports cars with a twitchy throttle that are hard for most people to control cost more to insure than a minivan, and why young people pay far more for insurance than older people, and why males pay more than women for insurance as well. These people might operate over the same square footage of road and experience the same risks, but pay sometimes vastly different premiums. If you were an F1 driver who had split second reaction times and could control a vehicle better than anyone on the road for probably 1000 miles around, certainly you'd like for insurers to take this into consideration before they bin you with the other 23 year old male Los Angelenos who drive a ferrari downtown, probably a rather reckless group of peers if we had to stereotype.
icedistilled 6y ago
>you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit privacy It amuses me that when it comes to phones tracking us, apps tracking us, google maps tracking us, etc.. we don't get the same outrage. Also, the answer to your concerns is regulation. Contact your state reps. I'm actually okay with pricing based on driving habits. Sure it won't be perfect, but it seems more just than pricing based on whether you're married or not or have a good credit score like insurance carriers currently doing.
- ianai 6y ago
  Agree. I might not like it for myself. But I benefit knowing there’s a cost for all the horrible drivers out there might make them drive more safely.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

> But I think you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit privacy. Most auto-insurance trackers are currently offering discounts "of up to 15%" if you qualify as a "good driver". Seriously, that's like what $40 on a typical 6 month policy? And you have to drive perfectly at all times, no speeding ever, no rapid acceleration, no sudden stops, etc. All of that is being tracked. And you most definitely cannot get in an accident at all. This all seems like conjecture. The auto insurance market is pretty competitive, and if an insurance company misprices their insurance, there are plenty of other insurance companies out there that will correct it.

gowld 6y ago

If insurance companies just wanted to raise rates, they already would have.

pmiller2 6y ago
I'm pretty sure the state insurance commissions have something to say about that, too.

perl4ever 6y ago

>Seriously, that's like what $40 on a typical 6 month policy? Interesting that you think car insurance costs around $500/year. Claims that people pay close to triple that on average seem to be abundant. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/car-insurance/average-cost-of-car-insurance https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/car-insurance/average-co...

taftster 6y ago
OK, fair to call that out. My bad for grabbing numbers from my arse. So let's take the average, which per your source, says $1400 / year (or $700 per 6-months). $700 * 0.15 = $105 savings per 6 months ($17.50 per month). So now you need to ask, will you qualify for the full 15% discount? If you stop too quickly or roll through a benign stop sign, you can forget it. And worse, don't you think that the insurance company in question already raised their rates by 15% only to give you a chance to earn that back with (quote) "good driving habits"? If they ding you for anything, then you're going to pay the higher rate. It's like a grocery store member card. If you don't have it, they just don't care, they just charge you the non-member price. But their member price is already profitable, so the few shoppers coming through and buying without a membership are just paying an additional gravy to their profits. Insurance companies want to get into this game, desperately. Oh, you don't have their tracker app installed? Well, you're going to pay the non-premium expensive rate and they get the keep the profit. Your good driving is not going to offset your demographic either. And then there's all the privacy concerns. No thanks, I'm going to opt out and not buy into the $18 per month non-discount with some gimmicky insurance company and instead give my business to a company that doesn't want to play premium discount games.

asdff 6y ago

>Driving is a random series of events and you can be caught in a situation that is your fault (legally) just the same as anyone else on the road. This is true, and that's why you pay more for car insurance in Los Angeles than in the desert. There is a base rate for the given area that everyone pays premium to, given the danger of a given square foot of road is different for every area. This is already all quantified and baked in, even driving habits from indirect sources like google maps or road conditions, so personal data collection will not change this. So why data collect at all if so much variance is due to local danger? Because a huge component of the variance is also explained by drivers skill, and insurers proxy this based on correlations from your demographic data, since they lack any other datapoint on your particular driving habits (other than accident history). This is why powerful sports cars with a twitchy throttle that are hard for most people to control cost more to insure than a minivan, and why young people pay far more for insurance than older people, and why males pay more than women for insurance as well. These people might operate over the same square footage of road and experience the same risks, but pay sometimes vastly different premiums. If you were an F1 driver who had split second reaction times and could control a vehicle better than anyone on the road for probably 1000 miles around, certainly you'd like for insurers to take this into consideration before they bin you with the other 23 year old male Los Angelenos who drive a ferrari downtown, probably a rather reckless group of peers if we had to stereotype.

icedistilled 6y ago

>you overestimate how much "you could save" by giving away your driving habit privacy It amuses me that when it comes to phones tracking us, apps tracking us, google maps tracking us, etc.. we don't get the same outrage. Also, the answer to your concerns is regulation. Contact your state reps. I'm actually okay with pricing based on driving habits. Sure it won't be perfect, but it seems more just than pricing based on whether you're married or not or have a good credit score like insurance carriers currently doing.

ianai 6y ago
Agree. I might not like it for myself. But I benefit knowing there’s a cost for all the horrible drivers out there might make them drive more safely.