autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Spins & Blame (statistics)

To: autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Spins & Blame (statistics)
From: "Jeff Winchell" <Jeff@Winchell.Com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 16:19:28 -0700
> Forget insurance cancellation for the moment.

I believe this whole thing got started because people were worried 
about sites being cancelled (as well as the varying definitions of 
safety). Since the latter is subjective, I would like to focus on 
something that can be more easily analyzed (site retention). Maybe 
afterwards we can delve back into the quagmire of what is safe. Since 
insurance cancellation will cause site cancellation, I don't think we can 
ignore it.

> Uhh, and that would be why they always want to know your commuting
> mileage and your expected annual mileage? No, they DO consider mileage.

It is a self reported number. Time is a much more important factor.

> You DO, OTOH, pay higher RATES for more annual MILEAGE.

It is a factor, but primarily in wide bands of mileage. It is much more 
relevant for people who rarely drive (i.e. collector cars) or drive 
heavily commercially (e.g., 20-30K miles per year).

I will talk to K&K this week (as I have to do this for some racing events 
our club is putting on), and get more detailed information on all of this. 
And I'll look into stats for average drivers (non-racers) from the 
insurance companies. DOT may compile stats, but I'm more interested 
in what insurance companies use to assess rates and cancellation 
policies. (BTW, as long as you want to pay enough, there is always 
someone who will provide insurance - so site retention really comes 
down to costs).

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>