They have fewer parts but may cost way more to repair. And that is just the beginning. There are many arguments to convince people that do not have electric cars to adopt one. EVs have fewer parts, which makes them more reliable and less prone to defects. They are safer than other automobiles. That should... READ FULL ARTICLE
The study is biased, because there is not a large enough sample to predict how the whole population will perform. There is also a learning curve for owners, service facilities, manufacturers, etc. that will eventually show a very different legitimate cost to insurance companies. If they want to remain competitive, they will have to lower their costs.
Just concerns. But of course insurance companies would love any reason to justify more expensive insurance.
This is a classic example of Much Ado About who knows what? In other words there is no data presented, and it reads very much like the skepticism about electric vehicles being impossible because there simply couldn't be enough batteries produce. Tesla statistics suggest that in autopilot you are about 1/5 to 1/10 as likely to have a significant accident on the highway if you're using their technology properly. This smacks of the kind of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) disinformation spread as a proxy to fossil fuel interests. The fact that it's garnered almost no interest suggests that most people see through it.
Do I trust insurance companies to be treated fairly/honestly? Hopefully most we can trust. Musk may have found yet another income stream. He'll have the data and I trust him more than most to use that data and collect a reasonable margin. This insurance angle may be yet another reason others won't catch up to Tesla in "Total Cost of Ownership".