MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Is equipment insurance worthwhile?  (Read 6136 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2013, 04:02 »
0
Its a trade: Does it pay?

During a lifetime no insurances of any  kind pays back.

My best advice is to save the money and put them in the bank.
Then when accidents happen, and they will, you just eat the expense.
I have been insured for everything all my life. And since I have never used the insurance much, I have a huge deficit on that account.
And for what? Feeling safe? being secure? There is no such thing. And assets are maybe not assets but the opposite. Whenever you your are stuck with a thing you are stuck in the past.

Maybe it is good when everything goes up in flames or gets stolen, so you can renew yourself.

For those who doubt my words, take a look in your garage or your garden shed and see those prized possessions you insured for a high cost some years ago. Or take a look on your shelf and see the old camera gear that is useless nowadays.

Tools are useless without human hands on them.
The only asset worth while is you, your intellect and your health. That will last and that is valuable, -so insurance that.



« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2013, 07:17 »
0
Isn't there a difference in premiums if you do this for a living (professional) versus just owning equipment as a hobbyist?

« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2013, 07:26 »
0
Isn't there a difference in premiums if you do this for a living (professional) versus just owning equipment as a hobbyist?

There is for me.  I just called my home insurance again and they said - yes it would be cheaper if you could insure your camera within your home policy.. but I can't do that - sorry.  If you are using your camera for a business it needs to go in your business insurance... because of the risk and how much it is used.  The thing is - I probably use my camera a lot less than a lot of hobbyists.    So far my best solution to get the cost down has been to simply insure less of my equipment.  I cut out the insurance on things that a burglar wouldn't steal if they were going through out house (like large lights and stands etc).

« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2013, 07:30 »
0
Isn't there a difference in premiums if you do this for a living (professional) versus just owning equipment as a hobbyist?

There is for me.  I just called my home insurance again and they said - yes it would be cheaper if you could insure your camera within your home policy.. but I can't do that - sorry.  If you are using your camera for a business it needs to go in your business insurance... because of the risk and how much it is used.  The thing is - I probably use my camera a lot less than a lot of hobbyists.    So far my best solution to get the cost down has been to simply insure less of my equipment.  I cut out the insurance on things that a burglar wouldn't steal if they were going through out house (like large lights and stands etc).

That's what I was thinking, too. My stands, studio lights, etc, aren't likely to walk away more than my lenses and D700's and speed lights.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2013, 23:48 »
0
Its a trade: Does it pay?

During a lifetime no insurances of any  kind pays back.


?? eh?
a few years ago my dumbo husband put petrol in our diesel X5. We had the whole thing fixed under insurance.  (apparently this is quite common and BMW now have a policy that if you're that dumb you have to pay for the repairs yourself) :)

in 2010 my Mini had an attempted break in; (I actually had all my gear (and a friends') in the boot and rear seat.) I had a gorgeous soft top Mini Cooper and they cut through the fabric, only to discover they couldn't reach their hands through due to the roof brace thingys. So I was left with a 4in gash. The entire roof bit had to be replaced, as well as the windows which had to be matched to the new roof. Can you imagine how much that cost?! I only had the car for two years, so the approx $2k in insurance was certainly worth it!

« Reply #30 on: February 24, 2013, 09:28 »
0
Diesel. Ha ha.
I once put diesel on my volvo. A whole full tank. So  I drove it to the nearest mechanics (YES, I did drive it on diesel!) and had him suck it out for 100 dollars.
I had the same car stolen twice, but the police found it, both times with broken front window and ruined lock.
So I put in new windows but not a new lock, I just used a screwdriver to start it with. After that it was stolen anymore.

Cost maybe 200 dollars.
Easily saved on the insurance I did not pay for.

But Im a crazy DIY guy, from far out in he country where we use pigs for pets and ploughs.

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: February 24, 2013, 09:48 »
+1
But Im a crazy DIY guy, from far out in he country where we use pigs for pets and ploughs.
Trained pigs pulling ploughs has to be your ultimate niche.  ;) 
Problem might be creating a market for the images.

« Reply #32 on: February 24, 2013, 09:54 »
0
Plowing is one of the things pigs do not need to be trained for, they just do it all day long. That is, if they have access to earth.
Never mind.
There would be a market for strange pigs pictures. But sadly I have eaten them.

tab62

« Reply #33 on: February 24, 2013, 10:44 »
0

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #34 on: February 24, 2013, 21:19 »
0

« Reply #35 on: February 24, 2013, 22:55 »
+1
When I started in microstock (2005), although I treated it like a business as far as using our Tax guy (reporting earnings, deductions, etc., alongside my 'real' job), I never got around to thoroughly investigating 'business' insurance and left my equipment on the 'house' insurance.  A year ago, we experienced a HUGE home break-in, and ~ $17K worth on lenses were stolen.  Amazingly, the thieves left my 5 plus Nikon camera bodies. 

Amazingly, our insurance company replaced ALL the lenses and flashes that were stolen, but did say I had to from now on carry a business rider since I was using it for business purposes as well as pleasure.  One of the lenses was the Sigmonster (Sigma 300-800mm) which I had purchased for ~ 2200 around 2006 or 2007, it was a steal of a price even then...

But the 'replacement' cost is now ~8,000 so I received the newest iteration with lens coatings my 'old' model didn't have, because my old model isn't sold anymore.  Insurance is for the unexpected, not the expected.  Perhaps you might consider just insuring what you would really want replaced and perhaps could not afford to otherwise replace.  Also maybe see if there are higher deductibles that might lower premiums, like some do for health insurance...

« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2013, 12:10 »
0
FYI

http://photo.net/learn/insurance

to which you should add: FYI, North Americans.


And that the rates are really low, as in too low to believe they can offer the same quality of coverage as other companies offering similar coverage.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
23 Replies
6045 Views
Last post May 17, 2009, 12:57
by Freedom
22 Replies
8800 Views
Last post January 11, 2011, 19:00
by djpadavona
2 Replies
1215 Views
Last post July 19, 2012, 12:44
by tab62
19 Replies
6077 Views
Last post November 27, 2012, 05:16
by gillian vann
5 Replies
1959 Views
Last post December 31, 2013, 09:36
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results