my insurence company didn't put a value on any of my equipment. i did. i valued it at what i thought it would cost me to replace it. my values did determine what my premiuns would be.
Creature's Comfort wrote: > > Hi, > > How insurance people and reputable commercial sources value a lens > does not necessarily reflect real world purchasing prices. Then just what *do* insurance valuations reflect? My insurance company claims that what they will pay out (on a replacement cost policy) reflects exactly that - the real world purchasing price. > I know > several people on this list who have bought one or more of these > lenses, in superb condition, for substantially less than the prices > posted by Ritz. Some were eBay sales, some were private party sales > between list members or other parties, and some were through various > photo shops. I happen to have paid only $400 for my A* 200/2.8 - a very good price. But I've got it insured for considerably more than that; around $750, I believe. There's no point in insuring it for more than that - the insurance company reckon that is what it costs to buy a replacement lens immediately (without waiting around for years for a bargain). But I don't have to limit myself to the $400 I paid, either; I could, but then I'd have to wait a long time to replace the lens. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-8295 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
