Insurance for an enduro? | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Insurance for an enduro?

My 2010 KTM 690 SMC using my Etobicoke address gets me quotes of $850-1,000 and using my cottage address in Waubaushene $600-800. I'm 30 now and ive had my M since I was 20, but I've had a few years off from street riding.
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Carlos Vincent I have a question for every one:
Why do you guys keep comparing rates??
You don't know anything about the other person: Age, discounts, coverage's, driving record, where they live.
All of that has a dramatic change in premium, I quoted myself $1100/year full coverage, $2M liability, $500/deductibles for a 2014 Kawasaki ZX10R.
What do you know about me, and why my rates are reasonably priced??

I'm just trying to make a point, that there is no point in comparing rates, no one is the same.



... because for the vast majority of users here on GTAM insurance is just a "black hole" that is paid into, with no need to understand why they're paying into this "black hole", or even what paying into this "black hole" gets them in return.
Insurance is a MYSTERY that cannot be understood, but must be paid.
Click to expand...

We are paying into this "bottom less black hole" for those guys that are doing wheelies down the 400/401 when they crash there is enough "Accident Benefits" to cover the injuries. $178,000 payout on one claim last year.
Hope that helps to explain where our money goes.

If the SS riders stopped doing silly things we would not be dropping money into the "black hole" that never gets full.
 
While I don't think it's just ss riders causing the problem this shows exactly what some of us have a beef with insurance for. If they based it on you and your personal record, those that ride/drive like idiots would pay and those with a good record would be at acceptable rates.
 
While I don't think it's just ss riders causing the problem this shows exactly what some of us have a beef with insurance for. If they based it on you and your personal record, those that ride/drive like idiots would pay and those with a good record would be at acceptable rates
Click to expand...

Point well taken and I agree, however let's say you are that good rider that follows all the road rules, you get into a misfortune accident, your all banged up and to get you back to your feet on a normal lifestyle there is a payout of $100,000, should your rates be increased to recover the amount that was used on your claim?
 
Carlos Vincent said:
I'm just trying to make a point, that there is no point in comparing rates, no one is the same.
Click to expand...

Personally, it's fun to look at maximums and minimums and to ponder the guy paying minimum potentially being a much bigger risk, but not "on paper".
 
I pay about $1100 for my 2010 690 Duke, which was the same price I was quoted on an SMC. 40s. Perfectly clean record.M2. TD. My WR250x was $600/yr during my first year of riding with State Farm
 
Blooton said:
one big factor to bear in mind is your Postal Code when getting a quote. Here in TO where I unhappily reside, my rate is $690. I put the same info in the online quoter using my Dads postal code near Algonquin park, and my rate would be $321.
Click to expand...

update to this post-got my renewal from TD, they bumped my rate to over $900. did some rate comparing and am now with Desjardin (who will do bikes only but you have to call) and have gotten it for $406 thats with liability and specified perils no collision
 
Carlos Vincent said:
We are paying into this "bottom less black hole" for those guys that are doing wheelies down the 400/401 when they crash there is enough "Accident Benefits" to cover the injuries. $178,000 payout on one claim last year.
Hope that helps to explain where our money goes.

If the SS riders stopped doing silly things we would not be dropping money into the "black hole" that never gets full.
Click to expand...


Intact Q4 2014 Financial Report..... Net Income +92% to Q4 2013. 2014 Net Income +81% to 2013 for the year.
 
fzrcraig said:
Intact Q4 2014 Financial Report..... Net Income +92% to Q4 2013. 2014 Net Income +81% to 2013 for the year.
Click to expand...



Those are some impressive numbers, if they were realistic we would be paying a lot less insurance, do you mind posting the website where you found those numbers.

Here is the website if you want to look at the financial reports for 2014.

http://www.intactfc.com/English/Investor-Relations/Financial-Reports/2014/default.aspx

Trying to attach the page that shows the written premiums vs claims, it seems the page is to big to attach, you would see it’s only a 5% profit at the end of the year.

 
Here are the results, hopefully they are legible.
 

Attachments

  • Intact Financial.pdf
    12.3 KB · Views: 16
I'm not sure why you are looking at that line to determine profit. See below under Net Income.
Poor Intact, barely making a go of it they are.
 
I'm looking at the line to determine profit on insurance side only.
You’re looking at investments Intact made which has nothing to do with insurance.

If your salary is $80,000/year, you invest some of the money returning you an additional $10,000/year,do you tell people your salary is $90,000??
 
Carlos Vincent said:
I'm looking at the line to determine profit on insurance side only.
You’re looking at investments Intact made which has nothing to do with insurance.

If your salary is $80,000/year, you invest some of the money returning you an additional $10,000/year,do you tell people your salary is $90,000??
Click to expand...


I disagree. The very reason that Warren Buffett bought Geico was for the access to money from insurance premiums. That is where the profit is to be made. If you recouped the 100k from the rider, in the example you gave, that would be a loan, not insurance.
Also, you stated that postal code is 20% of premium. In my case if I move from Woodbridge to Oakville, my premiums drop about 40%.
 
I disagree. The very reason that Warren Buffett bought Geico was for the access to money from insurance premiums. That is where the profit is to be made. If you recouped the 100k from the rider, in the example you gave, that would be a loan, not insurance.
Also, you stated that postal code is 20% of premium. In my case if I move from Woodbridge to Oakville, my premiums drop about 40%.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The very reason that Warren Buffett bought Geico was for the access to money from insurance premiums. That is where the profit is to be made
Click to expand...
Not sure if a 5% profit is considered a big profit, however if you are to invest, well, it can be very profitable.

If you recouped the 100k from the rider, in the example you gave, that would be a loan, not insurance.
Click to expand...
Exactly, that's why we all put in a deep bottomless pit to cover someone else's mishap.

Also, you stated that postal code is 20% of premium. In my case if I move from Woodbridge to Oakville, my premiums drop about 40%.
Click to expand...
Did you calculate your savings based on the monthly savings or yearly, you will get to different amounts, yearly is the correct amount.
 
Carlos Vincent said:
Not sure if a 5% profit is considered a big profit, however if you are to invest, well, it can be very profitable.



Did you calculate your savings based on the monthly savings or yearly, you will get to different amounts, yearly is the correct amount.
Click to expand...


5% is from insurance, but the majority of profit is from investments. That's where they make the bulk of the money. I would also guess that all expenses and liabilities are tacked on to the insurance side, to shrink the profit as well.

My rate goes from 950ish, to 530ish. Yearly.
 
When I read Lee Ioccocas book (none of it rubbed off) he said 5-7% all in is good profit. Was he fudging with numbers? Sounds skinny.
 
5% is from insurance, but the majority of profit is from investments. That's where they make the bulk of the money. I would also guess that all expenses and liabilities are tacked on to the insurance side, to shrink the profit as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, expenses from operating the company are listed under "Underwiting Expenses". They are not hidden costs, any company takes their gross income minus expenses the result is profit.

When I read Lee Ioccocas book (none of it rubbed off) he said 5-7% all in is good profit. Was he fudging with numbers? Sounds skinny
Click to expand...

That's about right, 7% would be really good
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom