Jim I think you are right. By the way we really do appreciate your knowledge
and input on the reflector. We have been dealing with this issue in Florida
since Hurricane Andrew in 1992. I have waiting to hear that this is not just
a Florida problem as there are catastrophic losses everywhere. As you say it
is what it is. If you can get a policy from a real insurance company you know
one that pays it's claims It will cost a lot more. Don't forget about the cost
of re-insurance has risen also.
As like most things It has to do with money. They want to make it so we get to
pay them.I will say this. Having worked in 3 major storms in Florida I think I
would be blessed to lose all of my antennas and such, but to have my home
intact and with very little damage. I love my radio stuff as much as anyone
else. Well It's time to load up the truck and head out for dinner. To all have
a great Thanksgiving. We all have much to be thankful for and are truly blessed
Thanks again Jim.
73 DE K4XZ Joe Patrick
God Made Man
Sam Colt Made Them Equal
________________________________
From: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2013 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Insurance for Tower
On 11/27/13 4:55 PM, KimoChun wrote:
> I don't recall the details of what part of my homeowners policy covered my
> tower failure around 2000, but they covered all material and estimated labor
On aspect, not specific to Kimo's anecdote, is that experience with insurance
companies before 2007 may not be relevant today.
The market and banking system anomalies hit insurance companies hard. In school
you learn about the idealized scheme where the sum of all the premiums
collected from all policy is slightly more than the sum of all the loss payouts
for the year.
However, in reality, what happens is that the money that is paid in, and not
yet used to settle claims, is invested in various speculative instruments
ranging from T-bills/T-bonds to Credit Default Swaps and other exotic
investments. In "good times" the profits from these investments allows the
insurance company to charge lower premiums for a given loss experience (e.g.
they only need to collect enough that premiums+investment profits is > loss
payouts).
AIG, for instance, was making money hand over fist by taking the counter side
to mortgage defaults: e.g. they were betting that the mortgages wouldn't
default, and they could collect premiums and never payout. This allowed them to
offer very competitive rates in their other lines of business. OOps, that
didn't work so well when the laws of probability went against them.
So, now, insurance companies in general have to charge higher premiums: the
investment income isn't there, the loss payouts are still there, so premiums
have to go up. Or, they can manage the future loss payouts.
And the latter is being manifested in a variety of ways:
Here in Southern California, it is becoming VERY hard to get new policies
written on existing houses, because large swathes of subdivisions are now
deemed "high fire risk"; essentially you draw a boundary some X hundred feet
from the boundary to undeveloped land, an everything in there is in the hazard
zone. Whether they are or aren't in real life is irrelevant (There are lots
of cases where the concern is legitimate.. urban/wildland interface is a big
problem). The problem is that anything that triggers a re-evaluation is a
potential cause for your insurance going away.
I think this is similar to the problem in Florida with hurricanes. The big
players have decided it's not worth it to insure houses in FL any more.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|