The LAST word in Offshore Powerboat (CAT & V) Insurance
#11
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New Hampshuu !!
Posts: 2,808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by GLH
I'll bet you $100 an OL 42 GTX worth $700k with Sterlings that can push it passed 120 is cheaper to insure than any $700k Cat that can run 120, all other terms of the policy beiing equal (the "jack" factor is out of this comparaison).
I'll bet you $100 an OL 42 GTX worth $700k with Sterlings that can push it passed 120 is cheaper to insure than any $700k Cat that can run 120, all other terms of the policy beiing equal (the "jack" factor is out of this comparaison).
#12
Registered
Thread Starter
oh no risk!
Not just yet....... We want more info ....if of course you allowed to divulge
So, 20 percent difference in premium for the same 700k to one goes 120 the other 150....sounds like it's in line to me?
GLH... No brused egos here I was lmao. I see your point. But with such a small difference in premium...could their be equality here?
Maximus
So, 20 percent difference in premium for the same 700k to one goes 120 the other 150....sounds like it's in line to me?
GLH... No brused egos here I was lmao. I see your point. But with such a small difference in premium...could their be equality here?
Maximus
#14
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Re: oh no risk!
Originally posted by Maximus
...could their be equality here?
...could their be equality here?
I'm ok with that I read that somewhere!
Care Max
#15
Allergic to Nonsense
Platinum Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Granite Quarry, NC
Posts: 5,011
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
If you follow GLH's thoughts to their logical conclusion ....... due to insurance premiums...... Cats are not as good as vees.
Of course.......... vees are still slower, less stable, less fuel efficient, worse handling at high speed (chine walking), and less predictable with steps . However, according to the insurance industry...none of these is safety related.
In most other aspects........... I have to admit......vees are better.
T2x
Of course.......... vees are still slower, less stable, less fuel efficient, worse handling at high speed (chine walking), and less predictable with steps . However, according to the insurance industry...none of these is safety related.
In most other aspects........... I have to admit......vees are better.
T2x
#16
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Originally posted by T2x
If you follow GLH's thoughts to their logical conclusion ....... due to insurance premiums...... Cats are not as good as vees.
If you follow GLH's thoughts to their logical conclusion ....... due to insurance premiums...... Cats are not as good as vees.
#17
Registered
Its just like any mis understood insurable risk. Catamaran is a word that scare the hell out of insurers for the most part. Most visualise a dangerous water borne rocket bound to crash, hey , they have rented and watched some freeze frame movies. V's on the other hand are what most of them have or remember growing up at the cottage, not the fastest thing around but anyone can drive one, hell their mommies could drive the 14 footer with the outboard on it so how dangerous can they be?
As for the HIGH premiums in general, remember, insurance funds are a pool of premiums, fewer boats than cars so less of a client list to fill the pool and usually payouts from the boat pool are larger than from the car pool(no pun intended) thusly each client insuring a go fast boat must dump a bigger bucket of cash into the pool to keep it full. Pretty simple really.
As for the HIGH premiums in general, remember, insurance funds are a pool of premiums, fewer boats than cars so less of a client list to fill the pool and usually payouts from the boat pool are larger than from the car pool(no pun intended) thusly each client insuring a go fast boat must dump a bigger bucket of cash into the pool to keep it full. Pretty simple really.