> Just like insurance, the less times I use my refund, the lower rate I pay per month.
Huh, what insurance works like that? If you pay a rate based on how much you used it, you might as well pay for the thing you're having the insurance pay for. I get that such an insurance will catch outliers still (saving you from a big boo-boo) but that's the only kind of thing insurances are for: big boo-boos (chance events that cost you disproportionately much compared to how much reducing the risk of them to zero would cost, like surgery or your house burning down). If you use it for frivolous stuff like, say, covering for a $10 meal, imagine the overhead, the management costs of all those claims, the arbitration, and the little you get out of it unless you order at a shitty restaurant and get unlucky nearly every time because you travel a lot for work and don't know the good places around -- oh wait, in your model that means you pay more anyway and it's not worth it, so every subscriber is really only lining the manager's pockets.
Just eat mediocre food for once or order elsewhere if the food is actually inedible. The lack of repeat custom is surely worth more to a restaurant than refunding those ten dollars you're sour about.
Yes. For example no-claims bonuses on car insurance means you pay less if you claim less.
> If you pay a rate based on how much you used it, you might as well pay for the thing you're having the insurance pay for.
No. For example say my car insurance is £500 or something. It goes down £50 a year every year I don't use it, due to no-claims bonuses. But it's still less than paying for a major accident out-of-pocket that could cost £5 million.
Huh, what insurance works like that? If you pay a rate based on how much you used it, you might as well pay for the thing you're having the insurance pay for. I get that such an insurance will catch outliers still (saving you from a big boo-boo) but that's the only kind of thing insurances are for: big boo-boos (chance events that cost you disproportionately much compared to how much reducing the risk of them to zero would cost, like surgery or your house burning down). If you use it for frivolous stuff like, say, covering for a $10 meal, imagine the overhead, the management costs of all those claims, the arbitration, and the little you get out of it unless you order at a shitty restaurant and get unlucky nearly every time because you travel a lot for work and don't know the good places around -- oh wait, in your model that means you pay more anyway and it's not worth it, so every subscriber is really only lining the manager's pockets.
Just eat mediocre food for once or order elsewhere if the food is actually inedible. The lack of repeat custom is surely worth more to a restaurant than refunding those ten dollars you're sour about.