From a Washington Post article on business owners who chose not to purchase flood insurance, by Michael Barbaro:
Take Crowe, who has operated his store near the water for 16 years. At $5,000 a year, the last premium Crowe said he was quoted, 16 years of coverage would have cost $80,000, a bargain if he is right and Isabel costs him up to $100,000.
In hindsight, then, flood insurance seems to make sense in his case.
*sigh*
UPDATE: The post printed my letter about this!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7845-2003Sep26.html