3 ms·
This argument assumes that insurance companies can't do math and/or don't care that they're losing money on this. I'm 100% convinced they have both the math sk
by BurningFrog 3y ago
This argument assumes that insurance companies can't do math and/or don't care that they're losing money on this.
I'm 100% convinced they have both the math skills and the greed to know this is profitable for them.
I'm less sure it's actually happening. Only proof I've seen is the internet comment a few levels up claiming it.
- tristor 3y agoI never said it wasn't profitable. I said it wasn't accurate. Insurance companies aren't concerned with the accuracy, they are concerned with the profit. It effectively provides some "data" to give them license to increase rates, whether its accurate or not. As long as their rates outpace their claim payouts, they'll be profitable. It's also definitely happening, not only do insurance companies buy telematics data from automotive companies, they also provide discounts (sometimes) for customers that voluntarily provide telematics data using devices which connect to the vehicle OBD2 port. One example: https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/ https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/
- BurningFrog 3y agoSo you think it's accurate in predicting which customers will generate bigger or smaller claims, but not in who is a bad or good driver? To me those are functionally the same thing.
- tristor 3y agoNo, I think it gives a veneer of data to the insurance company demanding more money, irrespective of any correlation to claims rates.
- BurningFrog 3y agoSeems simpler to just raise the rates.