Agents Are a Waste of Money?

[Mark]

I'm pretty sure agents can still sell progressive.

I know they can but not like they use to, before the company started making it so easy for people to go direct.


I pay 20% less with Progressive not to use an insurance agent and to just use the call center.


It will come to a point, where 90% of their business will come in direct and maybe at some point will stop using all agents.

 

[VolAgent]

Insurance companies that don't use agents inevitable spend just as much in marketing and in house sales staff as they would spend on agent commissions and sometimes even more. All those adds for AARP life insurance and medicare products don't just buy themselves.

It is genius if you think about it. Every time UHC or NYL runs an add, they are further putting the name AARP in front of seniors. AARP has gotten its business partners to pay for basically all the advertising it needs.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

John, I don't think anyone is arguing whether or not people should have the right to use an agent or go direct. At least I'm not. My argument is with Carroll stating that paying an agent 5% commission to assist in the process would be a waste of money. How is that any different from his organization getting paid to assist people in the enrollment of the insurance products they promote?

That would be great, if he said that, but he didn't:

"Anthony Carroll, associate state director for AARP, said this morning that consumer advocates were frustrated last spring, when efforts to pass an insurance-exchange bill bogged down. "We faced either ignorance or apathy from legislators," he said. One major sticking point was a proposal to require that every transaction on the exchange go through a licensed insurance broker, who would receive a commission of at least 5 percent. Carroll and other consumer advocates said such a requirement would be a waste of money."

He said the requirement that everyone be forced to choose a broker is a waste of money.

 

[carol369]

I ave a question about AARP. If they don't want agents why did I get an email today from an IMO promoting AARP med supps?

 

[sman]

That would be great, if he said that, but he didn't:

"Anthony Carroll, associate state director for AARP, said this morning that consumer advocates were frustrated last spring, when efforts to pass an insurance-exchange bill bogged down. "We faced either ignorance or apathy from legislators," he said. One major sticking point was a proposal to require that every transaction on the exchange go through a licensed insurance broker, who would receive a commission of at least 5 percent. Carroll and other consumer advocates said such a requirement would be a waste of money."

He said the requirement that everyone be forced to choose a broker is a waste of money.

My bad. Missed the "requirement" part. Of course, you've been in health insurance long enough to know that people will make uninformed choices when it comes to health insurance. An agent being compensated to lead someone in the right direction isn't a bad thing and is worth some compensation in my opinion.

 

[Yagents]

The question should be, does the client save 5% if not using an agent? Probably not. If the 5% stays built into policy price, the question now becomes, does it stay in AARP's/Exchange's pocket, or that of a valued agent that has skin in the game.

 

[stuy119]

John, I don't think anyone is arguing whether or not people should have the right to use an agent or go direct. At least I'm not. My argument is with Carroll stating that paying an agent 5% commission to assist in the process would be a waste of money. How is that any different from his organization getting paid to assist people in the enrollment of the insurance products they promote?

With the rates that we'll have under Obamacare, a 5% commission might be a raise.

 

[KJ in Miami]

Sad... but that is the nature of the business!! These AARP scumbags, who get money from UHC for endorsing their policy. I disagree that selling their policies makes it any worse. EVERY insurance company looks after their own interest, and if you do not believe that, I do not know what to say about you. Are you going to write a company who has historically had HIGH rate increases? Is that looking out for your client! Or, look out for their best interests. Touchy, sucks to have to sell them, but it is what it is. Then, some will attack Humana... it seemingly goes on & on.

According to AARP in Iowa, we are a waste of money. See more on my State Health Exchange Blog