Here’s an article that I can’t read fully because it requires a subscription. Maybe you have one.
This is the quote in the article from an insurtecher that caught my eye:
“I was told that I needed to buy general liability and property insurance. I thought that I could go to a website and buy it very quickly because I didn’t want to spend so much time with it.”
That’s rather like someone saying:
“I was coughing up blood and was told I needed to get my condition examined and treated. I thought that I could go to a website and do that very quickly because I didn’t want to spend so much time with it.”
While one’s financial health may not be as important as physical health, there is a mental health aspect in addition to the possibility that someone could lose much of what they own and/or earn over the next 20 years by being so focused on fast and easy (aka “customer experience” or convenience) and completely oblivious to what is at stake and the importance and value of full, professional consultation and treatment.
In my book “When Words Collide: Resolving Insurance Coverage and Claims Disputes,” I talk about the two fundamental premises for the insurance industry:
- The purpose of insurance is to insure.
- The mission of the insurance industry is to assist individuals, families and organizations in minimizing their exposures to serious or catastrophic financial loss.
Why do so many insurtechs not understand these simple and essential premises?
Photo by cplbasilisk 
Bill Wilson
Latest posts by Bill Wilson (see all)
- The Invisible But Potentially Catastrophic Homeowners Exclusion That’s Not An Exclusion - September 19, 2023
- Revisiting the Illusory Coverage Assertion Following a Claim Denial - September 19, 2023
- FREE Webcast: How to Survive and Thrive in a Hard Market - August 1, 2023
Straw man arguments and fallacy of composition comparisons do not impress. There is no comparison between life threaening sickness and purchasing basic insurance. If the agency system wants to remain relevant it better learn to compete. I saw a CGL program written by agents in thirty some odd states. They raved about the coverage. Too bad because it exclyded punitive damages, contratcual liability abd limited coverage additionally with the Montrose endorsement Not one even bothered to read the from. That is the state of the practice of insurance by agents so in waht way is Lemon ade any different or worst?
The premise of my blog post applies to EVERYONE in the industry, not just insurtechs. No question there are agents who should be selling shoes, not insurance, but there are many, many agents who do ‘get’ it. There are some insurtechs that i think get it, but not most of the ones getting all the publicity and none of those that purport to be able to insure you in a matter of minutes.