![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/21/2010 8:56 PM, Brad wrote:
On Nov 21, 7:57 pm, Eric wrote: If the economics are so compelling, the insurance companies ought to be the ones pushing for it. What says Costello? I'd like to hear an insurance company comment on it, but I suspect an insurance company may not benefit from something like Flarm. One simple case: all pilots equip with Flarm, company A's insurance payouts go down, their competitors offer policies at lower premiums that company A has to match to keep the customers, and ta-da! their profits are back to pre-Flarm levels. So, no financial benefit to the insurance company. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me) - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarmhttp://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl that, Eric............in a nutshell is why insurance company are bloodsucking parasites. That's way too harsh - Costello has served us well for decades; besides, I didn't say or imply they wouldn't or didn't want to do something like that, only suggesting a reason why the economics might not be compelling to them. I believe they are concerned about our safety. It's not like smoking, where policy holders that didn't smoke did reduce the companies payouts, so it was worth enticing those individuals with reduced premiums. One pilot buying a Flarm, or using it in low risk areas won't affect his risk, and the very small numbers of pilots and fatalities (compared to smoking) make it an actuarial nightmare. The economics are not their fault. But, if we do reduce the collisions and fatalities with Flarm or other methods, it should make future premiums lower than they otherwise would be. But that's really a small part of the benefit of reduced collisions, given the current low cost of liability insurance. It's the "staying alive" thing that is our payoff, personally and for the sport. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me) - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
K6 Mux and PowerFLARM example systems | Paul Remde | Soaring | 0 | November 15th 10 05:01 AM |
PowerFLARM questions | Greg Arnold[_2_] | Soaring | 21 | November 10th 10 04:05 AM |
PowerFLARM | Paul Remde | Soaring | 9 | November 6th 10 04:30 AM |
PowerFLARM | Greg Arnold[_2_] | Soaring | 6 | November 2nd 10 09:32 AM |
Build your own PowerFLARM! | Darryl Ramm | Soaring | 51 | August 19th 10 06:39 PM |