Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread 
12297 messages, Last post on Apr 13, 2007 at 11:55 AM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Let me try and get your second point. Far be it from me to defend the insurance industry, which has more than its share of scum (see: recent Eliot Spitzer actions); but let me play the devil's advocate, so to speak, to make sure I have this straight. If I were an insurance company, I would want my actuaries to give me, internally, the most accurate data possible about risks. The more accurate the risk estimates, the more likely I will set premiums right - not too low OR too high. Too high? Yes - a concern to insurance companies. Of course, they have an obvious incentive to not set the premiums too low - if they do they will lose money because paying out future claims will require more money than they have taken in. And of course, they have an incentive to set them as high as they can get away with. But on the other hand, they also have an incentive not to set the premiums too high - that is, so high that it creates what in microeconomics 101 is called "adverse selection" (Adverse selections means my best customers (the ones who realize taht they' have the least risk) realize they don't need my insurance enough to pay my super-high premiums, leaving me only with the worst customers (the ones with the highest risk, who know they need insurance even better than I do). So insurance companies have an incentive to charge the highest premium they can get away with, but they can't go TOO high or they create adverse selection. They have an incentive, in fact, to make riskier customers pay mroe and less-risky ones pay less. OK - so, hopefully what I've said so far is no big deal - surely, in-house, the insurance comapnies want the most accurate data they can get on the risks of different models (as well as on the risks of different drivesr, which they get from age, gender, tickets, accidents, etc.). But what you seem to be saying is that in public, it's a different matter. The IIHS is an industry front, not an industry data source - and is giving the public fudged, skewed data meant to mislead, so that the insurance companies can jack up their premiums in the most profitable ways. They might, for example, take a particularly popular car and give it a poor crash-test rating so that they can jack up the premiums. They might give better crash-test ratings to an unpopular car. But... if I were an editor at Edmunds.com, or Consumer Reports, or the NY Times, or Wall Street Journal, or any other standard news publication, I'd say. Wait a second - sounds interesting, but can you prove the assertion? Do you have two independent, reliable sources? Evidence that for each increase in one car's crash-test scores there's an equal and opposite decrease in some other model's scores so that it all comes out even each year? Or whatever - something other than hints? In short, can I see the evidence that the IIHS is fudging its data? I'm as cynical as anyone else, so I'm not saying you're wrong. Usually, I'd love to bash insurance companies, so it's surprising I'm not doing that here. I just need to see some evidence before I concede that you're right. If you have it, lay it on me - I'm very, very interested. (As for crash tests being not perfect proxies for real-life,, nobody has ever disputed that, but this is another issue and we'll get into that another time. Let me focus now on the fudged-data implication.) Thanks for anything you can tell me. |
|
|
Replying to: ray h (May 05, 2005 7:39 pm) ~alpha |
|
| http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/irep13e_20050513.htm | |
|
Replying to: brozhnik (Apr 27, 2005 5:06 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: annek (Jun 03, 2005 8:05 pm) By the way, I don't know where you're located, but in some areas (CA, NJ, etc.) 05 Accords are selling for up to $1,800 under invoice. So, you may be able to do better than your current $400 below invoice depending on the area. If you haven't done it yet I would recommend you check carsdirect.com for prices in your area (zip code), and if prices are not low enough try some major cities that are relatively close to you. This may save you hundreds of dollars. Good luck.
|
|
|
Replying to: annek (Jun 03, 2005 8:05 pm) If you're comfortable with the current styling of the Accord and you don't care about VSA (which will probably be standard on most mid-size family sedans in next 2-3 years, Hyundai just raised the bar by making it standard on all 06 Sonatas) and a few other new features, then buy the 05. The deals right now are great, especially in states like CA & NJ. We're waiting for the 06. We also considered waiting for the 07 Camry (coming in about 8-10 months), but we don't want to wait that long, hoping Toyota improved the steering/handling.
|
|
|
Replying to: bklynguy (Jun 05, 2005 12:33 pm) Good luck. 
|
|
|
Replying to: joon (Jun 03, 2005 11:12 pm) Question: I found an 03 camry in mint condition with all the airbag safety features I want. Can anyone advise on this? the seller is about $50 bucks above blue book and $100 less than Edmunds true market value price. I've heard the best deals or on cars 2 or 3 years old. However, with hondas selling below invoice, I don't know if that makes up for the typical depreciation one would face when first driving a new car off the lot. (I've always heard it's best to buy a car 2 or 3 years old with low miles if you can find one0. So, does it make more sense to get a price below invoice on a new car or to pay true market value price for private party seller price on a used one? The car is in excellent shape. The owner was very meticulous with it. I think that's why he's being such a stickler on the price. In other words, does the fact that dealers are selling the 05 accords below invoice make up for typical new car depreciation? how do I figure that out? is there a formula?
|
|
|
Replying to: joon (Jun 03, 2005 11:12 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: annek (Jun 11, 2005 6:51 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Hyundai Sonata
2010 Toyota Camry
2010 Honda Accord
2010 Nissan Altima
2010 Volkswagen Passat
2010 Mazda MAZDA6
2010 Ford Fusion
2010 Subaru Legacy
2009 Saturn Aura
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
