Insurers work with data/metrics and generally make decisions based on that alone[1]. I often feel that it's unfair that I pay more as a male, because I am an extremely responsible and defensive driver - fact is, men cause more expensive accidents more often. That's the data, that's what insurers care about.
At some point Geico likely did insure super cars, up until they started becoming highly anomalous in the data. The same has happened to cybertrucks, whether your highly restricted sample demonstrates it or not.
Insurance companies don't turn away profitable customers. Cybertrucks became a problem for Geico, but they are being tight lipped as to why; it might not be a reliability issue.
> I often feel that it's unfair that I pay more as a male, because I am an extremely responsible and defensive driver - fact is, men cause more expensive accidents more often. That's the data, that's what insurers care about.
Same - I remember a few friends complaining about this but an older friend basically explaining how insurance worked from the perspective of the company. Almost everyone will swear that they’re a great driver, and they can’t tell the difference until you’ve been driving for years. The only alternative would be the kind of monitoring + speed limiters that most drivers get extremely upset about so it’s unlikely to change before we get L5 self-driving.
At some point Geico likely did insure super cars, up until they started becoming highly anomalous in the data. The same has happened to cybertrucks, whether your highly restricted sample demonstrates it or not.
Insurance companies don't turn away profitable customers. Cybertrucks became a problem for Geico, but they are being tight lipped as to why; it might not be a reliability issue.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_analysis_(finance...