This should provoke some thought. What short and sweet questions should this generate for the people at NAGS from the Glass Industry?


Reference Manual 2006
ADP Estimating
PenPro®
Shoplink®
Audatex EstimatingTM
Graphics
Labor
Parts
Parts Exchange
Pricing
2006





"NG – Replace with NAGS Glass Part:
New glass that was not manufactured under the sponsorship of the OEM.
AUDATEX estimates provide NAGS glass part description, part number, price, and Audatex labor to replace the glass."


"MFG. PART NO. – The manufacturer’s part number for OEM and NAGS replacement
parts or descriptions on all other operations (e.g., repair/align, sublet, etc.)."

"PRICE – Displays suggested list prices for OEM replacement parts, NAGS glass, system
generated Parts Exchange New (PXN), and system generated Parts Exchange Salvage
(PXS), as well as manually entered recycled, sublet or aftermarket prices."


"OTHER PARTS – Dollar total of non-OEM parts (e.g., recycled, economy, NAGS glass, etc.)"

"Op Codes NG --Replace NAGS"


"NAGS(National Auto Glass Specifications, Inc.)

An organization that specifies, certifies, and publishes pricing for automotive glass. In the Audatex system, the use of operation code NG or EC automatically supplies the NAGS price when available. If a NAGS price is not available, there will not be a NG or EC code accessible for the glass part."

Mark1,

I'm not sure what the issue you are raising is but there are several angles to look at.

Mitchell owns NAGS and sells collision software to the body shops, insurance companies, TPAs, independent adjusters, and others. So does ADP, CCC, and others who must buy the NAGS data from Mitchell.

Mitchell/NAGS also sells the NAGS database with periodic updates to the AGR software industry, the AGR industry at all levels, and the TPAs.

Try to imagine a world without NAGS and you have to shut down most of the AGR commerce until a suitable replacement can be introduced.

Web quotes? Pay NAGS for the data or risk legal action

Insurance claim? The shops pay NAGS via the software subscription, the TPAs pay NAGs for the database, and the insurance companies probably own at least a copy of some software to periodically audit the TPAs.

Sounds like an interest AGRR article to try and trace the six degrees of separation from NAGS.

Mark I don't understand what you are showing us here. Can you explain what all that was on your post?

almost looks to me like those software companies do not recognize oem glass.

nags in other words is supplying pricing for after market parts, not oem. While nags has not tested after market glass, they are basically using the lowest quality, worst piece of glass they can find to set their pricing, and trying to convince all parties that all glass is the same. are there any tests of after market glass proving they are equal, or are we just assuming that if they are able to sell it, that it has met some govt requirement? That would explain nags ability to lower list prices while everything else goes up in price.

while i am thinking of it, how can a tpa pay the same price for a kit regardless of the kit requirement being 1 or 1.5,,,,,can't think of a thing that costs the same no matter what amount you buy.

Thank you Ralph, my point exactly.

To the text, has NAGS ever given this information to the glass industry? I don't think so. If it is incorrect, I would expect that NAGS will be mailing contrite letters to Audatex soon, demanding retractions?

Thousands of net priced parts, Nags 'certifying' prices, dramatic differences on numerous parts between NAGS list and OEM list...no "Premium" domestic parts, yet new numbers for "Aftermarket" parts when OEMs do something brazen such as "logo" a part.

The first question to Nags: is this a definitive statement that NAGS is an AFTERMARKET part price database? If it is....well, where does that leave all of us using OEM replacement glass?

Now, for those that will say that you have to buy a glass from a dealer for it to be OEM, I say HOGWASH.

Right off the bat I would bring up both Carlite and MoPar to dispell that rumor. There are cases, yes, for us to acquire an OEM logo glass we must go to a dealer, but NOT always. The point is, if you use a NAGS number, you have entered a "one part number fits all" twilight zone, and that's NOT reflective of the market.

What say you, Bud and Jessee? Care to defend the Colonel's Secret Recipe surrounding the benchmark revisions?

And guess what? I've got numerous calls taped where the TPA is specifically telling me that allowed prices are based on Aftermarket Glass, NOT OEM. Further, I have one insurer stating that pricing is based on Safelite. (you can guess who) They further told me on that tape that OEM parts were allowed (like they have any right to allow any parts) IF IF IF the OEM parts fell within their determination of fair and reasonable, which they repeated were based on Safelite. So, they pay for OEM parts so long as the pricing was for Aftermarket Glass. The insurer agreed unconditionally, twice. However, this licensed adjuster, by her own claim, would not produce for the customer in the threeway the clause in the policy that allowed them to do this.

Now, What say you insurers? (You too Hal...) Care to defend those 'surveys' in public touting 'fair and reasonable rates for the market' ???

No, I didn't think so.

Perhaps, after Hal mentioning that we should charge for what we do and do what we charge for, to avoid the FBI at our doorstep....we should consider the example of those two adjuster sisters, and we should be sending a few thousand documents to the FBI ourselves, now that they have the FBI's, and the media's, attention.

Good read guys. I have about had it with this TPA stuff .

Somebody once said it here before:

"Would you invest in a business that was unable to RAISE the costs of goods and services to keep in check with inflation or profit?" (what it takes to be succesful as a business)

Hell No you wouldnt!

Why should we?