So, I don't care about the claim severity, as a consumer (unless we're talking deaths versus scrapes). They're clearly talking about costs, which will drive premiums, but are certainly related to parts/labor costs and availability, which is solvable long-term.
Apparently I also don't care about claim FREQUENCY because the article notes that the frequency difference goes down (but does NOT go away) when controlling for miles travelled. What? How on earth does 'frequency' not have miles as a denominator? Okay, fine, they must consider it on a per-day or per-year basis, but as a consumer, again, I don't care.
As the consumer, I really care about whether passengers fare worse in the average collision, or are more likely to be in a collision.
Again, parts costs will come into line over the long term. This is a game the established manufacturers are already good at, Tesla will have to step up to catch up.
Apparently I also don't care about claim FREQUENCY because the article notes that the frequency difference goes down (but does NOT go away) when controlling for miles travelled. What? How on earth does 'frequency' not have miles as a denominator? Okay, fine, they must consider it on a per-day or per-year basis, but as a consumer, again, I don't care.
As the consumer, I really care about whether passengers fare worse in the average collision, or are more likely to be in a collision.
Again, parts costs will come into line over the long term. This is a game the established manufacturers are already good at, Tesla will have to step up to catch up.