http://www.comparethemarket.com/
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/
to name a few...
I understand that this was a legal issue due to the insurers (but even so, they only launched a year ago...) but what is it with American companies that they just don't seem to get the internet?
Comparing price of auto-insurance is really no different than comparing the price of flights, travel insurance, cars, houses, whatever. It's a product/service and it is not going to be one size fits all. Some insurance companies will be a better fit in terms of price and options available, so insurance companies that are competitive will actually get more customers by being on the comparison sites.
Good luck with the venture.
Most U.S. carriers don't cooperate with independent comparison sites, since they don't want to see their product commoditized.
Yes, and I stated that in my original comment. My point is that these corporations need to get with the modern times. It's a global playing field these days, technology does not stand still in one part of the world whilst your (not personally) archaic thinking catches up. It's the same thinking model as the RIAA.
Competition creates a price efficient market, which is the enemy of high margin businesses.
I have a 1978 Datsun/Nissan 280Z. Only one insurance company allowed an online/unattended quote for insuring that age car. Only one other company was able to give a quote after talking with them on the phone, all of the others didn't have the ability to do a quote, even for liability only insurance. I went in person to several places and the result was the same. The company that allowed me to get a quote online now has all my other insurance related business (renters/property/full coverage on my new car/etc.). It just so happens that they've been an amazing company to work with, particularly when we've had car related issues (getting rear-ended while stopped at a stoplight, hitting an animal in the middle of the night when there was no room to swerve/stop and rendering the vehicle undrivable, etc.).
Trying to go through the process to see what things are like, the list of makes of cars is an abomination. It tries to filter based on years the make was available, but isn't inclusive (Nissan starts at ~85, but Datsun doesn't exist for older dates, etc.) and ends up being an incomplete list for a large number of years (I sampled the most recent ~5 years and the oldest ~5 years and several major manufacturers are missing) as well as model of cars being incomplete for at least a few makes from those years as well.
The UI really isn't a problem, it just comes down to the company having the coplete set of data, which really is down to them either creating this list themselves or paying someone for it. I'm not sure of the case in the US, but if an online part company like http://www.eurocarparts.com/ or http://www.gsfcarparts.com can do it them I don't see what the problem is.
By far the easiest way to solve this is to do a registration plate lookup: however, I don't know if this is even possible in the US, and it would be on a state-by-state level so a bit of a nightmare. In countries like the UK, where there is a single source of plates that companies can buy access to, it's a lot easier.
Leaky could probably learn a far bit from how insurance quotation engines in the EU and other less complex markets handle this. Here in the UK there are many well established players doing what Leaky do, probably with more success (which is totally down to the fact the UK insurance market is much more centralised).
Nobody likes insurance companies, so there's certainly a market for an insurance company that people love.
Be ambitious. Build something big. Comparison sites are not a big or ambitious idea. Comparison sites are a feature of bigger platforms. If you're building a platform, call it that. Otherwise, build something bigger.
http://pandodaily.com/2012/12/05/from-kidnapping-and-bribery...
--EDIT-- no I see that it does not work like this, now that I've read more about it, it predicts rates. Here's hoping they can actually integrate with insurers in future because the services like that here in the UK are pretty useful.
But aside this, I get the deception here that they don't get pricing directly from Geico, but rather they calculate the price per Geico per State (if that is really true, because what stops them from harvesting the data off of a carrier website anyways and switch algorithm just in case they get subpoena or something - can you see a similar pattern of questionable legality of business practices with AirBNB?).
But the issue remains: what stops Geico from requesting their name to be removed from said website? After all, Geico is a protected trademark, and if Geico can prove that this website was providing incorrect information in regards to their rates, then they can claim that said misleading information is harming their business. To me, its a straightforward quick court case.
[1] http://gawker.com/5853754/the-seedy-spammy-past-of-airbnbs-c...
Side note: its really sad to think YC would go after such a business idea. Whats next? YC-founded youporn version 2.0??
EDIT: I never treated hackernews as a popularity contest. I always stay behind my word even if it may hurt someones feelings. I knew I will get heavily downvoted (which is fine) since YC is investing into this idea, but perhaps when you do so, maybe you can point out where I am being wrong, instead of just clicking down-arrow. That's kind of covardishy, if you ask me. :)
Most companies give discounts on bundling few types of insurances, and so it would be great if entire price could be compared. I am under impression that not all insurance companies provide full coverage for what people need, so just because car insurance is lower, total price may increase if you split the needs across few companies.
In other words, just going from the State filings is not going to take into account a lot of details that insurance companies are using to calculate your premium.
If you're in NY, CA, or MA, you're probably in good shape as those states have strong regulations.
Leaky told me that Geico's 6 month for a policy very similar to mine would be $681. It is actually $516, but it correctly stated that Geico was the cheapest (which it was as of a month ago when I compared them manually).
