Serious question: Why does anyone buy trip insurance unless old or tight budget?

[ducklite]

"Insurance isn't worth it until you need it" is garbage talk from agents who try to scare you into buying all kinds of coverage you don't need. Every time I try to renew my auto insurance, I get this obnoxious speech from my agent about all other kinds of insurance I need. I cut her off and tell her I just want to renew my auto, and to drop the sales speech.

 

There are sensible types of insurance to buy, and there are stupid types of insurance to buy. You can't just make a blanket statement like, "It's always good to have insurance" or "Once you need it you'll be glad you have it", because that's the type of thinking which robs consumers of so much value.

 

When buying insurance, you need to assess:

 

- What value am I getting out of this policy?

 

- In the worst case scenario, what will happen? Will I simply find myself annoyed that I lost money, or will it change my life?

 

- Am I buying so much insurance that simply cutting down on premiums would allow me to save more than enough money to cover many small or medium unexpected events?

 

- Is my coverage going to actually help me, or is it full of restrictions? Do I understand the restrictions on the coverage I'm buying?

 

- Did I do my best to purchase the lowest cost insurance for what I need, or did I just jump at the first sales spiel from a high-pressure salesman?

 

 

Keeping in mind that in some cases, the very expensive insurance is the difference between you having a check in hand and contractor pulling permits a week after a hurricane hits while your neighbor still has a blue tarp over their roof and is hoping the state will step in to bail out their insolvent insurance company six months later.

 

It also depends on your PNW. If you have nothing and get into a car accident that seriously injured or kills someone, there's not much that can happen. They can't get blood from a stone. If you have assets you want to protect, taking not only the highest limits of coverage but also an umbrella policy makes sense--particularly when you have teen drivers in your household.

 

Same thing with travel insurance. If you have decent health insurance in the US, pay for your plane ticket with a credit card that has various travel protections, and have homeowners insurance and go on an Alaskan cruise, you can probably purchase a very limited policy that covers evacuation and maybe interruption. But if you go on a cruise that visits far away ports--particularly in places like SE Asia, French Polynesia, Russia, etc., you would be beyond foolish to not take a policy with plenty of coverage for the above plus medical and given the current political climate, cancel for any reason.

 

For the typical Caribbean cruise, the loss if the cruise cost is pretty minor in the big picture. A few grand, whatever. The big risk is the medical and evacuation. That could easily run six or more figures, particularly if there is some sort if accident. Don't expect the tour provider to compensate, and read the fine print, the ship isn't responsible.

Edited July 25, 2014 by ducklite

[OzCanuck]

So why did I ask what everyone's "breaking point" was regarding insurance prices?

 

I asked because most of the answers I got to my previous question were quite poor.

 

My initial question was, "Why does anyone buy travel insurance unless you're old, in poor health (or have a relative in poor health), or on a tight budget?"

 

I reasoned that it was foolish to buy trip insurance unless you were in one of the above categories. My reason was based upon the fact that the cost was very high compared to what coverage you were receiving.

 

Most of the answers I received were of the following variety:

 

- I am buying it for peace of mind

 

- I bought it (no reason given) and I had to file a big claim later on, so I made the right decision (aka results-oriented thinking)

 

- It's paying a small amount of money to protect a larger investment

 

- Foreign medical expenses and evac expenses are so high that I have to protect my savings

 

 

All of the above answers, while appearing reasonable on the surface, would also be valid if the insurance were to cost double or triple of what it currently does.

 

It would still give you peace of mind. It would still protect you from high foreign medical costs. It would still be a relatively small investment to protect a larger investment.

 

We even had someone in the thread who laughably said they would pay quadruple (!!) for their same trip insurance coverage.

 

But that aside, I put that question forward because insurance rates that were double would change nothing except for your value. You would have the same coverage, but would just be paying double for it.

 

So why would some of you find that unacceptable? Why would some of you refuse to buy it at that point?

 

Because you would deem it to be of such poor value that it wasn't worth buying, even if it were protecting you somewhat from financial hits due to misfortune.

 

And that was my point in the first place. Trip insurance is already of very poor value. It doesn't need to double in rates to get there.

 

Yes, there are some cheaper trip insurance firms, and those have been posted in this thread. (See? Something good actually came of this whole thing. I really wasn't trolling!)

 

But even the better value trip insurance companies are still offering poor value. As was already explained here, the trip insurance industry's main costs were commission and overhead, NOT claims! That's bad news for the consumer. It means that a very small percentage of overall premiums end up back in the pockets of the insured -- which means you're getting terrible value.

 

Many other forms of insurance have a much higher rate of return to the average insured. This includes auto, health, and home. Life insurance is a mixed bag when it comes to value, but you can do fairly well if you shop around properly.

 

The worst-value insurance for the consumer tends to be the "one and done" policies -- where you are insuring a single event. This is because such insurance can be sold for a deceptively low price, as the insurance company's exposure is relatively small.

 

A good example of horrible value (but often-purchased) insurance is the LDW (loss damage waiver) at rental car companies. It appears on the surface to be a great bargain. For just $9/day (sometimes more), you can protect yourself against having to pay for any damage to the car, regardless of fault! Wow!! Just $9 per day to insure a car worth $20k or more? Sign me up! But do the math and reality sets in. Multiply by 365, and you're paying $3286 per year for ONLY COLLISION COVERAGE on a vehicle that isn't worth very much. That's a markup of about a factor of 8. Car rental companies now also sell daily liability insurance, as well, and make even more money from suckers. You actually have fools paying as much as $30/day for supplemental rental car insurance!

 

(Funny aside - About 15 years ago I was dating a girl who worked for Enterprise, and she stopped seeing me after we argued about whether or not the LDW was a good value!)

 

So while most of you believe it's "reasonable" to pay 5-7% of your trip value for trip insurance, yet it would be unreasonable to pay 10-14%, keep in mind that 5-7% left "reasonable" territory a long time ago.

 

I will say that I did learn one thing from this thread, which I will be examining next time I travel to a non-Canada foreign country. That's foreign medical insurance. I think that might actually be a valuable thing to have, even if also a poor value, simply because of the catastrophic financial consequences that can occur from not having it and running into some awful luck.

 

However, for most of you insuring the cost of your trip itself.... all I can say is that you're being taken for a ride and probably don't realize it.

 

Sorry, you've got it all wrong. You seem to have confused insurance with a product you actually want to use. Nobody buys insurance hoping that they will make a claim. You buy it hoping you won't make a claim.

 

So - saying it is poor value based on how much money you will get back in your pocket is nonsensical. It doesn't work for you, that's fine. It works for others.

 

What does this have to do with NCL, anyway?

[pokerpro5]

Keeping in mind that in some cases, the very expensive insurance is the difference between you having a check in hand and contractor pulling permits a week after a hurricane hits while your neighbor still has a blue tarp over their roof and is hoping the state will step in to bail out their insolvent insurance company six months later.

 

It also depends on your PNW. If you have nothing and get into a car accident that seriously injured or kills someone, there's not much that can happen. They can't get blood from a stone. If you have assets you want to protect, taking not only the highest limits of coverage but also an umbrella policy makes sense--particularly when you have teen drivers in your household.

 

Same thing with travel insurance. If you have decent health insurance in the US, pay for your plane ticket with a credit card that has various travel protections, and have homeowners insurance and go on an Alaskan cruise, you can probably purchase a very limited policy that covers evacuation and maybe interruption. But if you go on a cruise that visits far away ports--particularly in places like SE Asia, French Polynesia, Russia, etc., you would be beyond foolish to not take a policy with plenty of coverage for the above plus medical and given the current political climate, cancel for any reason.

 

For the typical Caribbean cruise, the loss if the cruise cost is pretty minor in the big picture. A few grand, whatever. The big risk is the medical and evacuation. That could easily run six or more figures, particularly if there is some sort if accident. Don't expect the tour provider to compensate, and read the fine print, the ship isn't responsible.

 

Your post makes a good argument for medical and evac insurance, and as I said earlier, I will be looking into getting that next time I travel abroad. I can see the merits in such a thing.

 

My criticism is toward those who are buying what is basically trip interruption insurance, or basically anything but coverage for medical and emergency medical evac costs.

[GeezerCouple]

Your post makes a good argument for medical and evac insurance, and as I said earlier, I will be looking into getting that next time I travel abroad. I can see the merits in such a thing.

 

My criticism is toward those who are buying what is basically trip interruption insurance, or basically anything but coverage for medical and emergency medical evac costs.

 

You've made it abundantly clear that you "disapprove" of the choices of others.

 

So stop repeating that (with or without your reasons).

 

You've made your point, many times.

 

We get it.

 

You disapprove of the choices of others here and elsewhere.

 

I'm sure we each disapprove of some of the choices of some others, in all realms.

Big deal.

We don't keep repeating it over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

 

GeezerCouple

[pokerpro5]

Sorry, you've got it all wrong. You seem to have confused insurance with a product you actually want to use. Nobody buys insurance hoping that they will make a claim. You buy it hoping you won't make a claim.

 

So - saying it is poor value based on how much money you will get back in your pocket is nonsensical. It doesn't work for you, that's fine. It works for others.

 

What does this have to do with NCL, anyway?

 

What does this have to do with NCL? How about the fact that NCL sells trip insurance?

 

Your assertion is the thing that is nonsensical. Value in insurance is derived from the following equation:

 

(Maximum benefit) * (likelihood of having to make a claim)

divided by

(Premium paid)

 

If you have several benefits, then you do the above equation and add them all together. That is your overall value of insurance. In most cases, the number will end up less than 1, which means the insurance company is making a profit. If the number is a small fraction of 1, you are getting fleeced. If the number is 1 or above, you are actually more likely to cost the insurance company money than make a profit for them, in which case your purchase was wise.

 

So for example, if I have a $5000 cruise trip, and I purchase trip interruption insurance for $300, and I determine the chance I don't make the cruise at 1%, here is how it breaks out:

 

($5000 * 1%) = $50

divided by

$300

 

That's 0.166, which means I'm getting an absolutely terrible value. It means the insurance company is charging me 6x what it really costs to insure me.

 

Now, let's say I am in poor health and I give it a 10% chance that my health will cause me to miss the same trip.

 

Now it becomes:

 

($5000 * 10%) = $500

divided by

$300

 

Now it's 1.666, which is a great value. So I would be smart to purchase trip insurance.

 

This is how rates are calculated at the other end. Basically, they determine their actual cost of insuring the average passenger (based upon extensive research), and set that as an absolute minimum baseline. Then they factor in their own administrative costs, and that is the "real" minimum baseline for the rate -- the lowest they can possibly sell the insurance and break even. From there, they research how much above that they can charge (usually many times that rate) and still get suckers to pay.

 

It is much easier to sell poor value insurance in these "one and done" situations (LDW, trip insurance, etc) because the exposure (chance you will file a claim) is very small, and rates appearing very low actually are several times too high, but the consumer doesn't realize it.

 

However, in cases with constant exposure (auto, home, health), the customer is insuring himself for every day for a 6-month period, which means the premium will automatically be many times the "one and done" type of rates, and there any premium increase for profit's sake will be very noticeable (and painful) to the consumer. That's why you get a much better deal with these types of insurance.

 

Going back to the LDW example, rental car companies can get away with charging $3200 per year for a collision-only policy because it is just $9 day, which seems harmless on a rental for a few days. However, if a insurance company tried to sell a $3200/year collision policy for regular auto insurance, they would be laughed off the phone by nearly every consumer, as the number $3200 (or even $1600 for 6 months) sounds (and is) huge for just a collision policy.

 

How about just admitting that you and others like to get fleeced by trip insurance companies because you have an emotional connection to the few thousand dollars you paid for the cruise, and somehow feel warm and protected by purchasing a horrible-value policy for an extra 7%?

 

It doesn't make you a bad person to admit that.

[pokerpro5]

You've made it abundantly clear that you "disapprove" of the choices of others.

 

So stop repeating that (with or without your reasons).

 

You've made your point, many times.

 

We get it.

 

You disapprove of the choices of others here and elsewhere.

 

I'm sure we each disapprove of some of the choices of some others, in all realms.

Big deal.

We don't keep repeating it over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

 

GeezerCouple

 

I don't disapprove of anything.

 

I believe everyone has the right to spend their money how they please.

 

If you want to withdraw all of your cash and light it on fire in a barrel for kicks, that's totally your choice and I will support your right to do so.

 

However, I am generally fascinated by consumer habits, and try to constantly challenge them (and often myself) to see where money can be saved.

 

The internet age gives consumers amazing power that they didn't have before. I got a spectacular deal on my last car because I was able to find out exactly what dealers paid for my car, as well as what incentives they received for selling it to me. Then I was able to call around and go with the dealership who gave me the best deal, armed with the knowledge of how far I could expect to push the best ones down. This sort of thing would have been impossible 15 years ago, unless you had connections to the industry. Now I can do all of the research without stepping outside my door.

 

I thought that Cruise Critic was a place where you discuss ideas like this, and try to open people's minds to new things and new ideas. In turn, sometimes my mind gets opened to new things, as well.

 

I realize that there will always be stubborn people who will still stick to their guns no matter what logic you present to them.

 

But I believe in being an informed and empowered consumer, and I enjoy having these discussions with others who also want to be the same (or already are and can teach me some things).

[ducklite]

Your post makes a good argument for medical and evac insurance, and as I said earlier, I will be looking into getting that next time I travel abroad. I can see the merits in such a thing.

 

 

 

My criticism is toward those who are buying what is basically trip interruption insurance, or basically anything but coverage for medical and emergency medical evac costs.

 

 

I generally find that the cost to add in other "stuff" adds about $5 to the cost of a medical/evacuation policy. IMHO, it's $5 worth spending.

[littlelulu01]

I think cruise insurance is the minimum I would purchase for a trip to Europe. I did not purchase through the cruise line but did purchase a more comprehensive plan through our big box TA.

 

If our medical insurance policy in the USA was good enough for Europe I think my daughter's university would not mandate that we have a separate policy for her study abroad in Italy. In fact in addition to the extra policy I also had to submit notarized bank statements and letter from the bank proving that we have several thousand cash available for daughter.

 

Cruise insurance is a pittance in the scope of an expensive trip abroad. It's also a pittance compared to what our family pays each month for medical, home, cars, boat, life, umbrella policy. Why would I risk everything I've worked for because I am not insured properly on a vacation when I bother to insure other aspects of my behavior, belongings, family, health and life.

 

Now if I were 20 years old and had nothing to lose and no assets... I would think twice about purchasing a travel insurance policy and probably not purchase one unless someone made me.

 

One more thing.... a coworker's young, strong healthy husband had a medical emergency and required med evacuation from their local hospital to Harborview in Seattle. Cost 25k and not covered with our company health care plan. She figured it was a one time event and did not purchase one of those inexpensive plans, I think $100 for the whole family for five years for medevac. One year later she was camping and burned herself. Guess what. Medevac again to Harborview in Seattle. Cost 25k.... and not covered under our medical insurance plan. Her family now has medevac insurance and yes she'll probably never need again. I checked into the plan and it does not cover cruise ship evacuations.

[GeezerCouple]

I don't disapprove of anything.

 

I believe everyone has the right to spend their money how they please.

 

If you want to withdraw all of your cash and light it on fire in a barrel for kicks, that's totally your choice and I will support your right to do so.

 

However, I am generally fascinated by consumer habits, and try to constantly challenge them (and often myself) to see where money can be saved.

 

The internet age gives consumers amazing power that they didn't have before. I got a spectacular deal on my last car because I was able to find out exactly what dealers paid for my car, as well as what incentives they received for selling it to me. Then I was able to call around and go with the dealership who gave me the best deal, armed with the knowledge of how far I could expect to push the best ones down. This sort of thing would have been impossible 15 years ago, unless you had connections to the industry. Now I can do all of the research without stepping outside my door.

 

I thought that Cruise Critic was a place where you discuss ideas like this, and try to open people's minds to new things and new ideas. In turn, sometimes my mind gets opened to new things, as well.

 

I realize that there will always be stubborn people who will still stick to their guns no matter what logic you present to them.

But I believe in being an informed and empowered consumer, and I enjoy having these discussions with others who also want to be the same (or already are and can teach me some things).

 

This rather belies your "fascination" claim.

 

You REALLY think you are going to change a bunch of minds on an Internet forum?

 

This is not a topic about "where" to purchase insurance.

It's WHETHER to do so.

 

And here, you continually and purposely ignore and discount the "sleep well at night" benefit of insurance.

 

DIFFERENT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT THRESHOLDS.

It IS that simple.

 

As an extra credit fact, for some people, they are busy enough that they don't have or want to take the time to find THE very best deal, here or elsewhere.

 

That's the same reason there is "freshly prepared takeout food", which obviously you would also disapprove of, because EGAD, some people are PAYING EXTRA FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND TIME SAVINGS.

 

You repeat that this is the prerogative of others.

 

So let it go already.

If you haven't "convinced the great unwashed" here by now, chances are slim that more of the same will accomplish much.

Quite the opposite is more likely.

 

Don't YOU have anything else to do with your time than keep repeating the same old, same old to everyone who responds?

 

Okay - here is your chance to repeat it AGAIN.

Enjoy!!

 

GeezerCouple

[rochelle_s]

 

My criticism is toward those who are buying what is basically trip interruption insurance, or basically anything but coverage for medical and emergency medical evac costs.

 

 

But why is it your concern what others do with their money?

 

I don't see anyone on here lecturing you about gambling. I have no doubt you think yourself a fabulous poker player. You've given many 'lectures' on the boards about your professed gambling knowledge. I'm certain we won't hear you espousing on the number of times you lost a bundle.

 

You have said;

 

• It's pretty much throwing your money away - Post 1
  
• it's a complete waste of money - Post 1
  
• yet I see many upper-middle class families waste their money on this garbage. post 1
  
• Someone please explain to me why they bother- Post 1
  
• These are losses that would devastate your finances - Post 19
  
• I personally think it's a waste of money- Post 19
  
• a huge waste of money - Post 22
  
• I don't understand is why people are willing to waste hundreds - Post 24
  
• It is a bad deal for the consumer - Post 76
  
• you are throwing your money away - Post 76
  
• an industry with a HUGE profit margin - Post 111
  
• when in reality they are getting fleeced a little bit at a time - Post 111
  
• suckers - Post 111
  
• Trying to figure out where the breaking point is - Post 162
  
• offering poor value - Post 191
  
• all I can say is that you're being taken for a ride and probably don't realize it - Post 191
  
• should NOT be spending a small amount at poor value - Post 194
  
• don't understand this is mind-boggling - Post 194
  
• garbage talk - Post 200
  
• Your assertion is the thing that is nonsensical - Post 205
  
• you are getting fleeced - Post 205
  
• still get suckers to pay - Post 205
  
• How about just admitting that you and others like to get fleeced -Post 205
  
• If you want to withdraw all of your cash and light it on fire in a barrel for kicks - Post 206
   
  

 

There's 25 different times in this thread that you have spoken derogatorily against insurance and the people who purchase it. Each and every one of these comments could be said right back to you in regards to gambling and casinos. But they are not. Because no one is on here all high and mighty with a lecture about what you do with your money.

 

You started this thread all rude and condescending even though you proclaimed it was not your intent. You actually changed your tune a little in regards to medical/evacuation coverage. Guess we are all not fools with our money. Time and again people have given you their valid reasons for purchasing whatever coverage of insurance they would like, from whomever they like. Whatever they choose it is right for them. Their money their decision.

 

Your original post asked if insurance was for the old and those on tight budgets? Clearly by the responses given the answer is NO. Step down off your horse and ease up on your derogatory and judgmental comments: it is not changing anyone's mind.

 

I mentioned 25 citations in this thread but their was only 24 in the list above. Let me pass to you this full length mirror and as you look inside may I quote the 25th;

 

"I realize that there will always be stubborn people who will still stick to their guns no matter what logic you present to them. - Post 206"

 

 

Enough said...

 

 

Rochelle

[ducklite]

I think cruise insurance is the minimum I would purchase for a trip to Europe. I did not purchase through the cruise line but did purchase a more comprehensive plan through our big box TA.

 

 

 

If our medical insurance policy in the USA was good enough for Europe I think my daughter's university would not mandate that we have a separate policy for her study abroad in Italy. In fact in addition to the extra policy I also had to submit notarized bank statements and letter from the bank proving that we have several thousand cash available for daughter.

 

 

 

Cruise insurance is a pittance in the scope of an expensive trip abroad. It's also a pittance compared to what our family pays each month for medical, home, cars, boat, life, umbrella policy. Why would I risk everything I've worked for because I am not insured properly on a vacation when I bother to insure other aspects of my behavior, belongings, family, health and life.

 

 

 

Now if I were 20 years old and had nothing to lose and no assets... I would think twice about purchasing a travel insurance policy and probably not purchase one unless someone made me.

 

 

 

One more thing.... a coworker's young, strong healthy husband had a medical emergency and required med evacuation from their local hospital to Harborview in Seattle. Cost 25k and not covered with our company health care plan. She figured it was a one time event and did not purchase one of those inexpensive plans, I think $100 for the whole family for five years for medevac. One year later she was camping and burned herself. Guess what. Medevac again to Harborview in Seattle. Cost 25k.... and not covered under our medical insurance plan. Her family now has medevac insurance and yes she'll probably never need again. I checked into the plan and it does not cover cruise ship evacuations.

 

 

Agree with you. A solid Travelguard plan ran us $500 or so on a three week, $20K Europe trip. About 2%. Money well spent knowing we wouldn't have huge medical and evacuation bills had there been an accident.

[smeyer418]

I don't disapprove of anything.

 

I believe everyone has the right to spend their money how they please.

 

If you want to withdraw all of your cash and light it on fire in a barrel for kicks, that's totally your choice and I will support your right to do so.

 

However, I am generally fascinated by consumer habits, and try to constantly challenge them (and often myself) to see where money can be saved.

 

The internet age gives consumers amazing power that they didn't have before. I got a spectacular deal on my last car because I was able to find out exactly what dealers paid for my car, as well as what incentives they received for selling it to me. Then I was able to call around and go with the dealership who gave me the best deal, armed with the knowledge of how far I could expect to push the best ones down. This sort of thing would have been impossible 15 years ago, unless you had connections to the industry. Now I can do all of the research without stepping outside my door.

 

I thought that Cruise Critic was a place where you discuss ideas like this, and try to open people's minds to new things and new ideas. In turn, sometimes my mind gets opened to new things, as well.

 

I realize that there will always be stubborn people who will still stick to their guns no matter what logic you present to them.

 

But I believe in being an informed and empowered consumer, and I enjoy having these discussions with others who also want to be the same (or already are and can teach me some things).

In my opinion you asked a question with a viewpoint in mind, and you argue with everyone who disagrees with your opinion/conclusion.

all insurance is a bad bet...much like the lotto and the one arm bandits on board, but that doesn't stop people from doing it.

Travel insurance is a bad bet UNLESS you need it. Yes there are less expensive ways to get the same coverage and we have suggested that to the people who posted here.

Yes the loss waiver on rentals car is terrible and most people's(but not all) credit cards provide some secondary coverage(in the US most credit cards are primary overseas).

I have a story about that too. My company provided Diners club credit cards to every employee in a traveling position. That card was PRIMARY coverage for car rentals throughout the world. The limitations were no exotic cars and no convertibles. The employees didn't like them because the BOSS got the mileage points on all the purchases(including the airfare that had to go on the cards)...two of the wisenhimer employees charged the car rental on their own credit cards. One had an accident and the other had the convertible stolen out of her parents(who she was visiting) driveway. The one out of the driveway at least used her own card that had rental coverage. the accident one did not- he paid for the claim-an expensive lesson.

[Laszlo]

You've made it abundantly clear that you "disapprove" of the choices of others.

 

So stop repeating that (with or without your reasons).

 

You've made your point, many times.

 

We get it.

 

You disapprove of the choices of others here and elsewhere.

 

I'm sure we each disapprove of some of the choices of some others, in all realms.

Big deal.

We don't keep repeating it over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

 

GeezerCouple

 

Where's the LIKE BUTTON!

 

Must be a politician or preacher:D

[BrPanthers99]

If you need that 50-100k airlift off the boat you will wish you paid the $75

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited July 26, 2014 by BrPanthers99

[fshagan]

I never have heard of anyone being evacuated off a ship except by the CG of the country nearby...and NONE of them charge. If there is no CG to get you the ship goes to the nearest port with some sort of "hospital"...that becomes your problem to get evacuated from.

 

I've read plenty of news stories with medical evacuation. Here is a travel advisory from the UK's Telegraph that says its not uncommon:

 

Medical evacuation by helicopter is not uncommon on cruise ships – the cost of an airlift, especially if the ship will incur sea days, could run into tens of thousands. It is worth checking the policy’s small print to find out the extent of any evacuation cover.

 

And the Los Angeles Times:

If you require an emergency air ambulance and are not insured for it, you better have an extra $15,000 on hand when the medical evacuation team leader knocks on your door.

 

Australians should be aware their national medical insurance often does not cover medical costs on board a ship, from the Sydney Morning Herald:

 

... the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade travel website - which warns all cruise passengers to take out travel insurance - says Medicare benefits are payable for people ''travelling between two Australian ports''. When Sandra Barrett consulted a doctor during an overnight P&O cruise from Sydney to Melbourne last year, she was shocked to be hit with a $1700 bill.

 

 

The doctor was not registered as a Medicare provider, meaning she was among thousands of passengers on board not covered by the national health scheme.

 

Getting to a hospital near your home is another high cost item that trip insurance covers, and that can be more expensive than either shipboard care or evacuation charges.

 

No one really needs insurance, but some people approach financial issues from the stand point of not only covering possible costs but also reducing risk. Its the reason some people buy annuities, some buy stocks, and some buy bonds.

[pokerpro5]

But why is it your concern what others do with their money?

 

I don't see anyone on here lecturing you about gambling. I have no doubt you think yourself a fabulous poker player. You've given many 'lectures' on the boards about your professed gambling knowledge. I'm certain we won't hear you espousing on the number of times you lost a bundle.

 

My "gambling" is a profession, and not just frivolously blowing money. For reference, I haven't held a job since 2003, and am not receiving any money from family members, the government, or any external sources.

 

Believe it or not, I actually advise people NOT to gamble on the ship, because the odds are horrendous and far worse than land-based casinos.

 

Please don't spout off about my "gambling" until you understand what a professional poker player/gambler actually does.

Edited July 26, 2014 by pokerpro5

[pieshops]

Ok so we are neither old nor on a budget but we generally buy insurance.

 

We were on the dawn a few years ago at thanksgiving when there were engine issues and the ship was without power for 2 days if I remember correctly. It happened on like day 8 of a 10 day cruise (I apologize if if don't remember all the details ). We were adrift for pretty much a full day and when they finally got a bit of propulsion back we limped into San Juan instead of Miami a day early.

 

Communication was not that great as far as how we would get back to miami so before they announced they had chartered flights we booked our own flights and paid for them I'm addition we needed extra nights at about hotel in Miami.

 

Insurance covered all these expenses and over the holiday weekend they were not cheap. It also covered meals and incidentals. There are 4 of us so it was expensive

 

So you never plan on using insurance but we were glad we had it.

[ducklite]

My "gambling" is a profession, and not just frivolously blowing money. For reference, I haven't held a job since 2003, and am not receiving any money from family members, the government, or any external sources.

 

Believe it or not, I actually advise people NOT to gamble on the ship, because the odds are horrendous and far worse than land-based casinos.

 

Please don't spout off about my "gambling" until you understand what a professional poker player/gambler actually does.

 

 

If gambling is seen as a form of entertainment and the gambler doesn't wager more than they are comfortable losing, and aren't playing to make money but rather for the enjoyment of it, does it really matter what the odds are? No. Perhaps you should be less concerned about how others spend their money, as the reality is that it's absolutely none of your business. By the way, I don't gamble. I have no moral problem with it, I just don't enjoy it.

[coka]

Hi PokerPro5,

As a monster hand sometimes ends up a bad beat, so too a well planned vacation goes awry. A lot of great answers have been given. Know when to stop being a calling station as it frustrates those at the table. Nobody will want to play anymore.

Coka

[rochelle_s]

My "gambling" is a profession, and not just frivolously blowing money. For reference, I haven't held a job since 2003, and am not receiving any money from family members, the government, or any external sources.

 

Believe it or not, I actually advise people NOT to gamble on the ship, because the odds are horrendous and far worse than land-based casinos.

 

Please don't spout off about my "gambling" until you understand what a professional poker player/gambler actually does.

 

 

You need to re read my post. What I said was that your derogatory comments throughout this thread in regards to insurance, insurance companies and the people that purchase it could all be said right back to you in reference to gambling, casinos and those that gamble.

 

My exact point was that no one is doing that. You are free to do what you like with your money. Why do you not respect others and provide them with the same courtesy? Let others make decisions about how they spend their money without disparaging comments from you like referring to them as 'suckers'.

 

In your very sarcastic Post #109 you said;

 

"I haven't seen a single post where people report buying trip insurance for years, spending thousands over time, and never using it.

Conclusion: Apparently it's typical for just about everyone to get big value out of trip insurance."

Once again the same thing could be said about gambling. When do we hear about the losses? Or that you just broke even?

 

 

Why is it that you are entitled to think that your gambling is not 'frivolously blowing money' but someone who purchases cruise insurance cannot think that their purchase gives 'peace of mind'? If I spoke to a 1000 financial planners I've no doubt that at least 999 of them will think that the purchasing of insurance is the better bet.

 

That being said I'm a CAS player and I gamble myself. And please do not 'advise' me about it. I'm not looking to turn it into a profession. I'm not waiting to hit it big. I play within my means and I play for entertainment. It's my money and I am free to do what I like with it.

 

My upcoming cruise is an insured holiday. It is insured for everything; medical, evacuation, cancellation, baggage, trip delay, etc. The total cost for myself and my daughter was under $60. Did I shop around to see if I could save a few bucks by eliminating everything other than medical/evacuation as you suggest ? No, I did not need nor want to. I am well aware of the exact benefits of my credit cards, my health insurance and my home insurance. I chose to purchase the insurance without haggling for a savings. I am more than happy with what was offered and at what I consider a very fair price. My money, my decision. As a gambler the $60 could easily be lost in a single hand of poker or blackjack or a couple of spins on a slot machine. I placed this bet on the insurance.

 

The only 'spouting off' has been from you. Your thread was critical from the get-go and regardless of how much information is provided, you still feel it is your place to pass judgement. Who put you in charge? This is not a discussion with you. It is you on your pulpit preaching to the masses. We all get that you don't 'play' the insurance game. Others choose to play. They know the odds going in and still they roll the dice. To each their own.

 

 

Rochelle

[smeyer418]

I've read plenty of news stories with medical evacuation. Here is a travel advisory from the UK's Telegraph that says its not uncommon:

 

 

 

And the Los Angeles Times:

 

 

....

Getting to a hospital near your home is another high cost item that trip insurance covers, and that can be more expensive than either shipboard care or evacuation charges.

 

No one really needs insurance, but some people approach financial issues from the stand point of not only covering possible costs but also reducing risk. Its the reason some people buy annuities, some buy stocks, and some buy bonds.

 

 

I read carefully the above stories but none actually says that someone was charged for the helicopter evacuation from the ship. They say it can cost up to X but no one was actually billed. Yes to be evacuated from the ship on land to a hospital gets charged but not from a helicopter(normally a military or CG one). but I buy insurance anyway. Its hard to believe that simple sinusitis cost $2000-there is almost always more to the story...

[cosmics]

Always go with good travel insurance and would never consider travelling without it especially to the United States a must have in my book.

[jame_g]

Most people don't have medical insurance that will cover them on the ship or outside the country. Even those that do will usually only have out of network coverage which often covers very little or has high deductibles and copays. Many foreign countries demand full payment up front, before they will even examine you. Even if you aren't charged for being taken off the ship, if you need to get back to the US, the medical evacuation transportation would bankrupt many people. The same if you or your travel companion dies, you might not be able to bring the body back home. And if you get travel insurance, despite what most people think, that pre-existing condition waiver is probably the most important consideration.

 

There are lots of reasons to get travel insurance. But what it ultimately comes down to is looking at your personal situation and the level of risk you can financially accept. What your own medical insurance, other policies, and credit cards cover are a consideration in this decision. However, I think it's ultimately very foolish to travel outside your home country without knowing for sure that you have coverage to make receive medical treatment and get back home safely. And what's worse is people who choose not to get coverage, and then come whining online when the cruiseline won't reimburse them for their cruise because something did happen that was not the cruiseline's responsibility. Your own decision, but also your own responsibility.

[graphicguy]

OP.....really don't care what your profession is. For reasons that befuddle me, you decided to star a thread daring to preach to us what we should do regarding travel insurance, based on your opinion.

 

Practically no one agrees with your view point.

 

Let me offer MY OPINION to you. We buy insurance. We see value in it. I've had to use it. I'm ahead of the game as a result. Your desire to tell all of US how stupid we are is falling on deaf ears, again, because we don't agree with you.

 

You're convincing no one, and quickly making enemies. I advise you to drop it.

[BreadsButter]

I typically read all comments in a thread before deciding to post, but I was getting more and more annoyed.

 

1.) Everyone has their own reason for doing or not doing things. Some don't mind losing money if something comes up... Some people would rather not. :cool:

 

2.) I've never purchased cruise insurance prior to my upcoming trip. I never felt it was necessary. My thinking COMPLETELY changed when my DH and I decided that we were bringing our soon-to-be 2 year old DD with us. As a *fairly* new mommy, I couldn't imagine having to worry about expenses if my little diddle got hurt! :eek:

 

3.) Most people have all kinds of other insurances on land, in the comfort of their home countries. I see the benefit of a little extra insurance while away.

 

4.) If I'm willing to blow $300 in a casino, then I can afford $300 for insurance.

 

This is just my point of view. Not knocking what other people do... I think I just feel strongly about having a little extra control over the unknown. :o