ATTENTION: The glassBYTEs.com forum is being retooled and will return with a new look and functionality that will hopefully help our readers even more. Watch for an announcement when it will be ready, it will be a few months.
You can still stay up on daily news and comment on stories by signing up for the glassBYTEs daily e-newsletter at glass.com/subcenter. There is no charge. Hope to see you there!
This was posted December 29: Mitchell Re-Issues January NAGS Benchmark, Will Undergo Methodology Review. And then there were, as of this moment, 4 people who replied---- INCLUDING YOU, ohm.
Isn't that all commentary, including YOURS, nitwit???????
yeah i saw people commenting on the pricing and agreed list prices to low, maybe they should honor mfrs am list prices or dist or brands etc , you know pgw ws is x$, pilk ws is x$, dot # ws is x$, lsg carlite mopar etc or something like that... but how about labor or their numbering system... how could it be improved... listen no matter what $ you pick it wont stop tpas etc from low balling you but honestly all glass is not the s6ame and pricing should refles=ct that.
I'll be the first to admit I have a hard time following some of the links OHM posts, but as to industry issues, I wouldn't call him a nitwit.
Frankly, I agree with him about why there isn't more discussion about this completely unprecedented NAGS "recall" of the Jan update.
Who facilitated it? Who has enough "pull" with NAGS to cause this? What is the catalyst for it? Was it smaller shops? Was it TPAs? Was it insurers? Was it network shops? Was it "the" large vendor?
If you can't see the importance of the answer to those questions, and where it leads, no matter "who" is the answer, then you're missing a huge point, and now, potentially a huge opportunity.
No matter what happens now, whether we get answers, or not, Mitchell and NAGS has a very large problem.
Myself, personally, I expect them to "go dark" and once again try to hide behind the "proprietary methodology" screen to avoid scrutiny.
It won't likely work, this time, though, due to two key points that I believe may have brought this about since last March. Gerber, and the Georgia Supreme Court decision.
Mark 1, I said it on December 30 and I repeat here:
Mitchell realizes the industry is finally waking up to the absurdity of what it does and they are rightly fearful of becoming irrelevant as far as pricing is concerned.
THIS FORUM, which they monitor, has been hammering them for their insurance company loving bias and pointing to the total and absolute nonsense of their "benchmark" crappola which equates with nothing in the real world.
They are getting real nervous, Mark 1, AS THEY SHOULD!!!!!!!!!!!! They are not at all happy by the posts of people like my own man and old timer. They see the cracks in their armor and don't know whether to **** or go blind.
I found it, thanks. And I see that the Georgia Supreme Court refused to hear the case. That's great news. The fact is State Farm is in breach of contract on thousands of claims because they do not follow their policy language. Too bad more people don't hold their feet to the fire.
Now, just connect the dots........and see the forest through, or in spite of, the trees. Check the timing, read the program and see who the cast, or players, consist of, and....did I mention connect the dots? lol
credibility GONE>>>>>>>>>>>“There was some erroneous data in there,” Rozint said. “… It basically caused a drop in the list price that shouldn’t have happened.”