Howard wrote:
Some won't write Twins over 25
years old but they'll happily write 60 year old single engine aircraft.

Yep, we ran into one like that also. Great comments Howard.

Another thing that strikes me is that the underwriters don't assume the risk
for the rules that they make up. Each of my policies shows the actual
companies assuming the risk and the list reads from far and wide and from a
very small percentage to a large percentage. It's like a mutual fund. The
underwriter pawns off a percentage of the coverage to different insurance
companies, mostly with names you've never heard of. So why the bizarre
rules? Maybe the final insurance company only wants to have x % of it's
risk put into general aviation?

Recently we've had a similar situation arise in the agriculture industry.
Insurance companies are once again allowed to purchase farm land for
investments. They also have "managed investment" divisions that are out
buying land on behalf of retirement funds. The retirement fund manager goes
to the insurance company and says "We have $xxxxx, we want this percent
invested in row crop farms, this percent invested in cash crop operations,
this percent in contract acreage, this much must be irrigated, this much
must be dry land. Here's the money, go do it." It's almost bizarre, just
bizarre enough that I can see insurance companys saying "Where can we get a
great rate of return on a little money?" and someone starts telling them
how high aviation rates are.

Jim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004