I received an interesting ad in the mail yesterday. I didn’t even need to open as it had one of those plastic view windows. Normally they just show the address, but in this case they showed a message from All State Insurance.
“7 out of 10 people who switched to All State saved money”
My question is, what about the other 30% of the people? Apparently they switched insurance and paid more?
The only way All State could make this worse is by changing the line to read,
“3 out of 10 people who switched to All State paid more for their insurance.”
Now I am aware there are other reasons to switch; the motorist who gets into a car accident every month and needs strong customer service support to continue to support their driving habits.
This brings up a question. Is there any requirement that after you have caused multiple accidents your license is revoked?
Furthermore does license revocation actually accomplish anything, or does the motorist simply continues to drive without the permission of the state?
Maybe like house arrest the offender should be required to wear an RFID ankle bracelet that prevents the car from starting when within a certain distance of the gas pedal.
Notice how on almost all crime shows they eventually find the bad guy through a database of known criminals?
If this is not discrimination I don’t know what is. I think banks should be required to hire a certain number of felons so as to combat this type of discrimination.
The government already employs this option — isn’t it time everyone else did too?
Advertising to Fail
February 13, 2010 by Steve
Advertisement
“3 out of 10 people who switched to All State paid more for their insurance.”
That’s a great line item for the ad guy’s resume, but they really shouldn’t mention it to the marks customers. But then, they probably weren’t expecting anyone to employ the sophisticated mathematical technique of subtraction.