John Hancock Offers Apple Watch Series 3 to Vitality Life Insurance Customers for Just $25

[iSee]

...Folks, you're not getting a 'free' Apple Watch so you can dictate iMessages to your friends, they're doing it because they know it will eventually improve their profits.

Of course. But here their profits increase when you live a longer, healthier life.

Not everything in life is a nefarious crypto zero-sum game.

Anyway, it's not like someone is someone forcing you to buy this life insurance.
Don't want life insurance? Don't buy it. Want life insurance but don't want to send data to JH to verify your healthy lifestyle for cheaper life insurance? Then don't. Don't want to live a healthier lifestyle and nab an Apple Watch discount at the same time? OK, don't.

 

[5105973]

Young healthy people, beware. I’m seeing a lot of previously young healthy people felled by Lyme disease and autoimmune disease. Stuff like this will come out of the clear blue and knock you on your butt or onto unemployment. I have met so many women, especially, this has happened to. I don’t know why it’s happening. They don’t even have family histories to foreshadow the crap storm that has befallen them.

Just be careful about the data you trade away, and why it’s being solicited from you and what the end game for society could be. We all age. It happens faster than you can dream of when you’re in your 20’s and have your life ahead of you. There are so many toxins in our environment and food we don’t know the effects of. Colorectal cancers are on the rise among age groups these cancers never affected before. Okay, off my soapbox. Enjoy your Apple Watches.

 

[Bballrob]

I am not OK with Progressive claiming the accident was my fault and increasing my rates because I was doing 2 mph over the speed limit.

But they’re right. If you were doing the speed limit, you wouldn’t have been in that location at that time and the accident likely would not have occurred.

 

[mattopotamus]

Sure, that's how it starts. Consider how close we are to this basically being compulsory if it would already cost you about 43% more than you're paying now to avoid it. Soon those not wanting to report their data will be priced out of the market--they just need a few more sheep that care more about saving a few bucks than they do about their privacy and the rest of us won't have a choice.

again 30% is a lot more than a few bucks. I drive safe, why the hell do I care if they monitor that. Take the tinfoil off.

You leave it in your car for 6 months. After 1 month you get an initial savings and after 6 months it's locked in. I have had the discount for a few years. They monitor your speed, your breaking patterns, and the time of day you drive (midnight to 4am are the only times that "hurt" you). It cannot increase your rates only lower them.

 

[speg]

I don't really see a downside here. This looks to be shockingly forward thinking for an American insurance company.

Manulife is a Canadian company.

 

[mattopotamus]

But they’re right. If you were doing the speed limit, you wouldn’t have been in that location at that time and the accident likely would not have occurred.

This. Obviously they are playing the odds. They are saving money by not paying out claims when people have snapshot plugged in and are speeding.

 

[djlythium]

Geico did something similar to me, I got rear ended, police report even declared it was the other driver's fault and they shot my rates up and blamed the cause of accident on me. I found out Geico likes to do this to make their money back even if the driver wasn't at fault.

I believe it.
[doublepost=1508773945][/doublepost]Insurance companies are, foremost, in the business of making money. So, as innocuous as this initiative seems, their main goal is probably to get people to be more healthy, betting on better health associating with reduced healthcare costs for the company. Theoretically, they're right, but evidence suggests that just giving people a fitness tracker does not spur them to practice more healthy behaviors.

Overall, I am suspicious of any company, especially for-profit companies, including Apple, which is why I appreciate their transparency on privacy.

 

[xxmrcxx]

We have vitality at work ... I had joked with coworkers about putting my fitbit on my dog lol

My mom put her Fitbit on the KitchenAid mixer until she hit the 15k steps.

 

[SuperMarioKart]

The news alone will lead young people to research life insurance. I'm not sure anyone older with life insurance would switch over just for a $329 savings or $359 if it's true your wrists swell up as you age.

Great move by this company. The Apple "partnership" alone will bring them much more revenue via free advertising than many paid adverts would.

 

[charlituna]

A "tracking" device that just gives them diagnostic information from the vehicle including speed, time of day, and hard breaking. Oh the horror.

Many of those devices were revealed to also send GPS data which is why folks were in a snit.

As for this, I say if the program is completely upfront about what information it’s receiving and folks can opt in and out as they wish (even if it means losing a premium discount or whatever) then there’s no issue. Now if it turns out they are gathering some information they didn’t state upfront rake them over that appropriately, even to the point of lawsuit if needed.

 

[roland.g]

Not available in New York. That’s awesome!

 

[artfossil]

What a terrific idea! I wish my university would do this.

 

[lolkthxbai]

lucky bastards

 

[The Martian]

again 30% is a lot more than a few bucks. I drive safe, why the hell do I care if they monitor that. Take the tinfoil off.

You leave it in your car for 6 months. After 1 month you get an initial savings and after 6 months it's locked in. I have had the discount for a few years. They monitor your speed, your breaking patterns, and the time of day you drive (midnight to 4am are the only times that "hurt" you). It cannot increase your rates only lower them.

You just stated reasons why I would not want this device. I do travel after midnight many times for legitimate reasons (and I don't drink ever) and so they would penalize me for that. And you say that they cannot increase your rates only lower them. My answer to that is....For Now! Soon they will put in wording that will allow them to raise your rates based on braking, speed, and time of day you drive.

They are not doing this to save you money! They are preparing to collect more money from you but let you get used to it under the guise of saving you money at first.

 

[redscull]

A "tracking" device that just gives them diagnostic information from the vehicle including speed, time of day, and hard breaking. Oh the horror.

I work inside this industry. A LOT more information is collected than that. Not to mention there is no context captured around your hard acceleration and braking, like whether doing so was because you are a “bad driver” (eventual higher premiums) or because you needed to save your life to avoid another traffic incident. Make no mistake, you are selling your privacy for a small sum, and the absolute only reason this feature is made available to you is because the insurance/car company makes an even larger sum off your data.

 

[kyleh22]

I don't really see a downside here. This looks to be shockingly forward thinking for an American insurance company.

Many insurance companies already subsidize fitbits and step counters through company sponsored programs.

 

[Mtmspa]

Before the watch launched, this is more of how I thought it was going to go: basically motivate someone else to pay for it and/or subsidize it much like free* or $99-$199 cell phone deals. I imagined that maybe some of the rumored health monitors built in might be good enough to get insurance and/or the Gov medicare program to pay for it (or most of it) much like one can watch certain TV channels in the afternoon and find people can get all kinds of stuff- even a motorized cart- for as little as free. For example...

Glucose meters, catheters, various kinds of braces/wraps/stimulators, oxygen makers, mobility devices, and on and on... some of which MUST cost as much as the Watch either outright or given some time for sending replacement supplies over and over.

I actually imagined the catalyst for Watch was some brainstorming session with the prompt: what other technology could we make that can be delivered to the end user for cheap or free while still getting us our full price? And a health-sensor-loaded watch concept was born.

This is so wrong on so many levels, I don’t know where to start. Many the mods will just delete it.

 

[The Martian]

Not having read the terms of the agreement can you get the insurance and the watch and let them track you for 2 years to get the watch for free and then turn off the link? If you want a free Apple Watch that would work and as long as your agreement is only to provide that data for 2 years you are not violating any terms.

 

[redscull]

Why?

If the supermarket sold milk for $3/jug, but offered me a free jug of milk if I just tell them the cereal I pour it on, sure!

Why shouldn't the customer be allowed to choose if their private information can be sold for a price? I feel the $3 is more than enough to compensate for them knowing I eat Cap'n Crunch. Someone else might not think so, but why can't there be that option?

It’s called precedent. Firstly, you are saying it’s ok to exchange privacy for money. Soon that will be required just to get the $3/jug rate, and if you opt out, you pay a penalty price of $4/jug. And no one will complain because $3 is such a better deal than $4, and it still looks a lot like the old price on the sticker (even though the true old price was $2.25, but marketing made sure you never viewed it that way).

Secondly, by agreeing with the idea of selling your privacy, you start down the path of selling more and more of it. Originally they just wanted to know what cereal you poured the milk on, but soon that price “discount” will require you to share the ratio of milk to cereal, where you bought the cereal from, where you did the pouring at, how many people in your family are eating cereal and milk, their ages, when they eat it, if they watch tv or read news while eating it, etc. And then they sell this information to other companies which you might not trust nearly as much as your friendly supermarket or milk provider.

 

[sw1tcher]

A "tracking" device that just gives them diagnostic information from the vehicle including speed, time of day, and hard breaking. Oh the horror.

Breaking:

Braking:

 

[bearda]

actually a fantastic idea and great business model

healthier people = possibly less hospital and medical visits = less payments by them

This is a life insurance program, not medical insurance. Same model applies, though.

 

[techwhiz]

This reminds me of the trend these days where car insurance wants to give you a “discount” on premiums if you agree to install a tracking device in your car. You’re sacrificing your privacy and lining their data-driven pocket books for such a small trade.

Exactly.
I'll pass.

 

[bearda]

Not having read the terms of the agreement can you get the insurance and the watch and let them track you for 2 years to get the watch for free and then turn off the link? If you want a free Apple Watch that would work and as long as your agreement is only to provide that data for 2 years you are not violating any terms.

It looks like the terms of the agreement aren't visible to customers either yet (there's a page that says orders start November 6th, but that's about it). This isn't a straight agree to this and we give you a free watch thing, though. It sounds like you're signing up for a 2 year payment plan and for every month you meet a certain activity level as verified by the watch they excuse the payment, though.

Yeah, it's your watch when you finish the payment plan. They've gotten 2 years of benefit by then, though.
[doublepost=1508777611][/doublepost]

Many insurance companies already subsidize fitbits and step counters through company sponsored programs.

John Hancock does already. When I signed up they sent me a Fitbit for no additional charge to use with their Vitality program. I already had an Apple Watch that worked with their app so I gave it to a friend. They also offer some very light discounts on other trackers, but about what you'd get ordering through Amazon compared to retail.

 

[Bacillus]

Worst case you can just let your dog wear it for a week.

"Analyzing it's nature and intensity, it has come to our attention that your activity logs are showing structural hyperactivity of a mere unnatural kind.
We have come to suspect your AppleWatch is displaced or may have come in the wrong hands. Please contact our call centre....."

 

[Wowereit]

Why?

If the supermarket sold milk for $3/jug, but offered me a free jug of milk if I just tell them the cereal I pour it on, sure!

Why shouldn't the customer be allowed to choose if their private information can be sold for a price? I feel the $3 is more than enough to compensate for them knowing I eat Cap'n Crunch. Someone else might not think so, but why can't there be that option?

You have to look at it in the long run.

Problem is that "indirect discount for people who share data" becomes "direct discount" quite quickly which is the same as "penalty for people who don't".

Calling it incentive for one thing or penalty for another is mostly a philosophical difference.