Would you still feel the same way if it were stolen before the flow, but you were not reimbursed until the flow was over, thus losing from 1 to 4 supers of honey?
Yup. Should it increase it's replacement value? Sure. But not to the point of you buying "new" equipment and reimbursing you for retail honey sales. You would have lost 1-4 supers of honey. How many would you actually lose? Who knows. Maybe the hive swarms and you get one super. Maybe the weather is perfect and you get 5. I can't tell you which one, no one can. But in either way, you'd have to expend considerable time (inspecting, extracting, selling), energy, resources (fuel, electricity, money on bottles, lids, labels, treatments) to get that retail price of the 1-4 supers, that you don't have to spend because the hives were stolen. Are you worse off? Absolutely. But not 4 supers worth of honey at retail price worth. There is a difference between net and gross.
I also wouldn't feel any different if the hives were stolen in September, when you already took the honey off, you didn't medicate for winter yet, you didn't feed for winter yet, and you didn't lose your 30% to winter yet. It's about reimbursing you on the date the theft happened for the value of the item as of that date. Not on what will happen, or might happen, or what you could do with it, or what you could replace it with, whether that item will increase in value or decrease in value, it's all irrelevant to me.
Would you feel the same if no "equal" replacements were available and you had to buy new or drive 300 miles to get the used?
Open the back of ABJ and tell me there are no replacements available. Go to the NC Ag. Review Classified section and tell me there aren't replacements available within 100 miles of you.
You have to assume the free hand of economics is at play. These are bees. They aren't rare collectibles.
Remember, finding a replacement, making the deal, and going to get it can be quite costly, too. That should be included in the value.
No doubt. And I'm not saying it shouldn't play a role in the overall replacement value. My point is that you need to price the cost to actually replace the item of comparable condition, NOT to replace used equipment and an established colony with the cost of new equipment, a package, and your gross profit on your "estimate" of honey sales.
I have to disagree with this because there are not Used Hives for sale on every city street corner like there are for used vehicles. Plus, it is kind of frowned upon if you buy used hives from an unkown source due to foulbrood concerns.
Hives are routinely purchased and sold in the industry. Happens every year out of almonds. To say that every hive is full of foulbrood is shenanigans. Some bad apples in the bunch. It happens. To say you can't ever buy any established colony because 1% are infected with foulbrood is ridiculous.
Hives DONT get worse like a mechanical device does. They get better.
To be accurate, the hive (woodenware) actually does get worse. The colony will get better, for a period of time, before it then gets worse again.
In the end, many of you feel like you've been "wronged" by an insurance company's value in the past. Is that clouding your judgment on what you think should happen here? They screwed you in the past, so that's ok to screw them now? Or is it more about equity? On what the hive is really worth?
To me, it's about what that hive was worth on the day it was stolen. Not what happens in the next 2 or 20 months. Not what you COULD replace it with that's newer or better, and not with what you COULD replace it with that's worse off and inferior (such as a package). It's about putting you in the same place you were, as of the day the theft happened, no better, no worse, no looking at future transactions, not giving you a gain or a loss.
