Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
1–10 of 32 posts
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#2Weird, how did I miss that apps like this even exist? Seems a little creepy to me, though maybe it cuts premiums for some people?
"Both companies’ core products are apps on smartphones that use the sensors in the phones to collect data about how people are driving, such as whether they are speeding, frequently braking hard, or picking up their phones to text when they should be paying attention to the road."
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#3Together with mandatory insurance laws, is the government literally forcing us to let companies spy on us? Unless you're wealthy enough to afford the higher rates (for as long as those are offered).
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#4Together with mandatory insurance laws, is the government literally forcing us to let companies spy on us? Unless you're wealthy enough to afford the higher rates (for as long as those are offered).
Well, the citizenry could elect people to pass laws to forbid such actions.
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#5If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#6If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?
Some level of car insurance is mandated by law in every state. Might as well make it as cheap as possible for yourself.
Additionally, many people can barely afford their car. It's crazy how many people are driving around in a car worth more than their annual salary. $60,000 vehicles and such, especially trucks. It would take them a while to "self insure" against the risk of totalling that.
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#7If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?
Some level of car insurance is mandated by law in every state. Might as well make it as cheap as possible for yourself. Additionally, many people can barely afford their car. It's crazy how many people are driving around in a car worth more than their annual salary. $60,000 vehicles and such, especially trucks. It would take them a while to "self insure" against the risk of totalling that.
I was thinking more about the people driving $2k-$5k cars.
The last thing they need is their insurer jacking their rates because they're ending too many trips in bad zip codes.
You can "incentivize them onto public transit" all you want but most of those people would already be on public transit if there was even a $40/mo difference.
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#8If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?
Even with perfect information about the past/present, there is still uncertainty which can be insured against. Current models are nowhere near precise enough, and probably will never get there (self-driving cars will replace the need for insurance at the individual driver level before we have perfect models of driving risk)
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#9If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?
Some level of car insurance is mandated by law in every state. Might as well make it as cheap as possible for yourself. Additionally, many people can barely afford their car. It's crazy how many people are driving around in a car worth more than their annual salary. $60,000 vehicles and such, especially trucks. It would take them a while to "self insure" against the risk of totalling that.
New Hampshire doesn’t require car insurance. https://www.thehartford.com/aarp/car-insurance/new-hampshire...
Re: Boston startups merge to create driver-tracking giant for insurance industry
#10Together with mandatory insurance laws, is the government literally forcing us to let companies spy on us? Unless you're wealthy enough to afford the higher rates (for as long as those are offered).
Well, the citizenry could elect people to pass laws to forbid such actions.
Yeah I mean, take California for example: they basically prohibits insurance telematics completely (these apps cannot operate on CA customers)