chevy86

David Archer and Fast Track

61 posts in this topic

35 minutes ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

AIG must have been stoney broke Ted 

Just refresh my memory about how much they have paid out to sponsor the All Blacks again?

I told you offsider Barryb there is no need to start trying to explain or justify the way insurance companies operate.  I know all that already.  What you or Barryb have not been able to advise is that comprehensive list of major NZ insurance companies that went broke as a result of Christchurch.

Even if AIG did go broke I would say the Japanese earthquake and tsunami(ten times the loss no doubt) would have had more to do with it as did Christchurch

They didn't go broke Tom because they had adequate re-insurance in place. The only one who didn't was AMI, being a Christchurch based insurer at the time they had significant market share and found out that the re-insurance they had in place failed to cover all liabilities. As a result the govt reqd insurers to take their covers from 1 in 500yr events to 1 in 1000, hence the requirement to buy more re - insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, barryb said:

They didn't go broke Tom because they had adequate re-insurance in place. The only one who didn't was AMI, being a Christchurch based insurer at the time they had significant market share and found out that the re-insurance they had in place failed to cover all liabilities. As a result the govt reqd insurers to take their covers from 1 in 500yr events to 1 in 1000, hence the requirement to buy more re - insurance.

Well you are the one who firstly said the insurance companies had lost heaps and would take years to recover from Christchurch and secondly introduced the MacDonald Vague article into the thread(MacDonald Vague are specialist insolvency practitioners for those who do not know).  I assumed that article(which I cannot be bothered reading) was all about how many insurance companies went broke.

Now you are telling me none went broke so I am not sure exactly what it is you are trying to say.

Suggest you are a bit confused - perhaps you should go lie down with a cold flannel on your forehead and come back to us when you are a bit more coherent

Anyway as I have said this thread is about how much (if any) Fast Track has out back into the NZ industry not about whether Insurance companies are worth their premiums

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, barryb said:

They didn't go broke Tom because they had adequate re-insurance in place. The only one who didn't was AMI, being a Christchurch based insurer at the time they had significant market share and found out that the re-insurance they had in place failed to cover all liabilities. As a result the govt reqd insurers to take their covers from 1 in 500yr events to 1 in 1000, hence the requirement to buy more re - insurance.

What about Western Pacific Insurance--collapsed(no pun intended) due to earthquake claims.Queenstown based but obviously had insufficient re-insurance.

But to get back ON TOPIC---"show me the money Fast Track!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chevy86 said:

What about Western Pacific Insurance--collapsed(no pun intended) due to earthquake claims.Queenstown based but obviously had insufficient re-insurance.

But to get back ON TOPIC---"show me the money Fast Track!"

Western Pacific weren't a major insurance company Chevy but hear hear to the 'lets get back on track' statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say an average premium of $4000 - levies,GST. Leaving 70% $2800 * 25% (brokerage average), $700 * 20% he has allocated to Fast Track, $140 * number of policy holders. Would he have signed up 250? = $35000.

Just rough guesses above, but it won't be far wrong I would say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nerula said:

Naysayers are having a field day at the expense of someone who is trying to put back into the sport he loves. 

Tall poppy trompers and blog site bitter pricks!

Rubbish, Fast Track insurance are riding on the back of some serious goodwill and there is some accountability with that. Specifics to date is what most are asking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Utter Bullshit. Get in touch with Archer and he will tell you. Just don't come on here and slime the guy.

Come on, man up and contact him. Then come back here and you tell us. Pricks like you just want others explaining then you sit behind your alias and pick holes. Its just a shit way to contribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nerula said:

Utter Bullshit. Get in touch with Archer and he will tell you. Just don't come on here and slime the guy.

Come on, man up and contact him. Then come back here and you tell us. Pricks like you just want others explaining then you sit behind your alias and pick holes. Its just a shit way to contribute.

You have made 1534 posts and only 234 likes, that suggests who the shit contributer is. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Nerula said:

Utter Bullshit. Get in touch with Archer and he will tell you. Just don't come on here and slime the guy.

Come on, man up and contact him. Then come back here and you tell us. Pricks like you just want others explaining then you sit behind your alias and pick holes. Its just a shit way to contribute.

Totally disagree Nerula. I contacted the entity that runs Fast Track as well as HRNZ to ask them how much of our premuim  would go back to the industry if we swapped insurance brokers on our commercial building- didn't hear back from either group.

This is all about profit for Fast Track first, supposed "returns to the industry" are a distant second on the agenda.

Yes they have given some money back but at what cost? Vero, Crombie Lockwood and I am sure there are others are significant sponsors to the industry, I wonder what they are thinking given the racing game has effectively given them the two finger salute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it also true that Fast Track Insurance was not able to be swapped as insurance brokers for any Equine matters?, Have been told this is the case but not sure, seems bizzare if so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, rdytdy said:

 

My understanding is that Fast Track only do Home, Contents, Motor, Rural and Boat cover.

So no commercial insurance or bloodstock cover.

Thanks, thought that was the case just wanted confirmation, Bit of a missed opportunity trying to target Equine people but cant take on any Equine portfolios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, cantab matt said:

Yes they have given some money back but at what cost? Vero, Crombie Lockwood and I am sure there are others are significant sponsors to the industry, I wonder what they are thinking given the racing game has effectively given them the two finger salute

How much money did Crombie Lockwood give to Stakes for NZ Racing ? I can tell you - $0.

If a Club chooses to change their broker from CL to FT then that is a commercial decision for the Club and I'd imagine that part of the decision is the contribution CL are making to sponsorship and how that looks compared to what FT are offering. If its not a commercially better deal, then no matter whether you are a individual or a Club then there is no obligation to change over.  Id say most of the clubs that have had stakes added courtesy of FT are still with their existing broker, its just the individuals/studs/farms/trainers/owners who take up FT's broker service select their local Club for the stakes. 

In my opinion, here is a guy who supporting racing by coming up with an innovate offering and attempting to increase stakes (which as any readers on here understand is a very hot topic) and every one wants to bag the guy. NZ Racing needs more people that have a interest in racing and are contributing to growing the product/stakes in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a win/win for all and a great call by Archer...dont knock him at least hes being proactive and I know people will say hes lining his own but thats what business is all about....it used to be called " reciprocal trade ". Not sure what the pimply faced uni graduates call it today ?? They will have some new buzz word for it !!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Nerula said:

Utter Bullshit. Get in touch with Archer and he will tell you. Just don't come on here and slime the guy.

Come on, man up and contact him. Then come back here and you tell us. Pricks like you just want others explaining then you sit behind your alias and pick holes. Its just a shit way to contribute.

I think you are getting a bit precious here Nerula.

The original question was how much Fast Track has put back into NZ racing via this promotion.  There has been the odd general comment about insurance companies (including from me) but David Archer or his brokerage has not been attacked.  People just want to know that's all.  

And in particular I would like to know(and will never find out) if anyone involved in NZ Racing has had a benefit from the promotion(for instance anyone in the hierarchy).

We get Fast Track shoved in our face every time we get on the NZTR website or turn on Trackside so I believe it is a legitimate question.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

I think you are getting a bit precious here Nerula.

The original question was how much Fast Track has put back into NZ racing via this promotion.  There has been the odd general comment about insurance companies (including from me) but David Archer or his brokerage has not been attacked.  People just want to know that's all.  

And in particular I would like to know(and will never find out) if anyone involved in NZ Racing has had a benefit from the promotion(for instance anyone in the hierarchy).

We get Fast Track shoved in our face every time we get on the NZTR website or turn on Trackside so I believe it is a legitimate question.  

Tom you are being honest saying you don't know. At a meeting Archer advised our group that it his behest BrokerWeb hat put 750k into FT. The directors said" that enough" and Archer has put in more to advance the money to over $1 million.

He explained that until it reached critical mass it would not make a profit. And they are not there yet.

I strongly recommend you contact David and get the real oil yourself. If you are part of an organization ask David to address you.

 The man likes to talk.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nerula said:

Tom you are being honest saying you don't know. At a meeting Archer advised our group that it his behest BrokerWeb hat put 750k into FT. The directors said" that enough" and Archer has put in more to advance the money to over $1 million.

He explained that until it reached critical mass it would not make a profit. And they are not there yet.

I strongly recommend you contact David and get the real oil yourself. If you are part of an organization ask David to address you.

 The man likes to talk.

 

Well you seem to know all about it and have a connection with the bloke.  If he provided you all this detail how come he didn't tell you the amount the scheme had contributed to the industry?

I have insurance sub agencies as part of my business and would assume that the Fast Track arrangement works the same way.  I get a percentage of the premium the person pays - they more they pay the higher the commission I get.  There is no 'critical mass' involved it is a straight out percentage.  I do not see how they can be stalling any payment to NZTR on the basis that the scheme has not taken enough premium yet.

From where I sit it(critical mass) seems like an excuse to me.

Having said that Gubellini seems to know the answer we are seeking.  How are they making sure the benefits are being divided evenly and fairly around the country?  Who decided Matamata deserved extra stakes?

 

 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in response to your last question re Matamata. If you buy insurance from FT you state whether you wish the residual go to TR or a club. Now say a good number put down Matamata------------then say that club insured asssets-------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead