Best final expense IMO's for telesales?

[DonP]

But what NSRH is not saying is he's raping them on the back end . Most of those agents are making 2-4% renewals and he's making 10-15%. The override on Fyc is just gravy after the lead expense. Were the huge money is being made is 8-12% overrides on the big block of business which could be $30 million plus yr in yr out.Those agents have to hustle forever as they have no backend .

 

[goillini52]

No, you didn't see that from me.

We pay up to 70%.

Do the math on what agents make in a day when they are writing 8,000 to 12,000 in premium weekly.

You canbuy a LOT of leads for $4-$6,000 plus per week.

 

[NSRH]

So they cash flow the same as a F2F who is on 125% writing $4480 to $6720.

I have no argument with telesales - distribution is distribution, and almost any product/service today is distributed using different mediums.

But, if I were ever tempted to go the telesales route, I'd call @jdeasy and tell him my plan so he could slap the silly out of me over the phone.

View attachment 5472​

You budgeted zero dollars in your equation for leads. Almost every single F2F agent is buying leads consistently.

Redo the numbers and it'll make more sense.

 

[NSRH]

But what NSRH is not saying is he's raping them on the back end . Most of those agents are making 2-4% renewals and he's making 10-15%. The override on Fyc is just gravy after the lead expense. Were the huge money is being made is 8-12% overrides on the big block of business which could be $30 million plus yr in yr out.Those agents have to hustle forever as they have no backend .

The word "rape" is not one I would use in this context. I'd respectfully ask you reconsider using that verb to describe how we treat agents.

However, here is why I believe the fail rate in the F2F market is so high. Most recruiters use a contract level to lure agents, and unsuspecting agents are conditioned to think the higher the comp the higher the income.

This couldn't be farther from the truth.

Process, infrastructure, training, and a steady flow of leads trumps contract level.

In telesales, TV is king. The time gap between interest and making a buying decision is compressed substantially resulting in a much higher closing ratio.

Indy agents cannot get on TV, and even if they could handle that big of an influx of leads at one time, the cost many times is the deterrent.

In my opinion when the IMO takes 100% of the risk on marketing it proves that there is a real partnership.

Hiring F2F guys and selling direct mail leads is old news. When one of those agents fails out it's not a big deal, there was no exposure.

In a free lead, Telesales environment, we are all counting on each other to make this work.

Needless to say, there are many ways to skin the cat, and I know it drives many nuts that we write a ton of business like we do, but the failed face to face agents thrive in this environment.

It's not for everyone, but for many, it's what their looking for.

 

[NSRH]

You canbuy a LOT of leads for $4-$6,000 plus per week.

Great, more agents should do that, and I wish them the best!

 

[Rob Lion]

In the telesales world getting into set ups like NorthStar aren't bad at all, two types of people join those set ups hustlers who wanna make enough money to go full comp and do it on there own or sales minded people who don't want to or can't handle paying for business expenses every month.

 

[Cross Fire]

But a face to face operation would pay MUCH higher commissions. Did I see that you start 'em out at 30%?

I'm not insinuating that you don't get anything for the $900 but not explaining it up front and asking people to attend a webinar before telling them about an out of pocket of $900 Reeks of a cheesy sales pitch.

 

[goillini52]

Reeks of a cheesy sales pitch.

With extra cheese.

 

[DayTimer]

You budgeted zero dollars in your equation for leads

Leads can easily be kept to $400/week or less for a F2F agent who works them properly to sell $4-$6K/week in AP. So there is still quite a gap between the F2F at 125% and the telesales at 70%, is there not?

And then there is the telesales platform fee, which I also did not account for in my scenario. I'm not really criticizing your business and I would hope you don't take it that way. But in terms of potential agent comp, I do not believe they are equal opportunities.

Now, if you were to tell me that I could sit in my home office for 8 hours/day and field call after call after call of folks interested in hearing more about final expense life insurance and that I could close them over the phone and enjoy 90%+ persistency with no out of pocket lead costs and the trade off was a 70% contract instead of 125% ... I might actually think about that as then I could get back 1 to 4 hours a day of drive time, see my family more, cut my fuel costs to zero, wear and tear on the car to zero, etc.

But, on the other hand, if I am going to sit there for eight hours a day attached to an autodialer doing outbound calls, then I'd rather stay right where I am as a face to face door knocker. In other words, if I'm going to take a 55 point pay cut, I need it to be because the opportunity comes with an "easy button" in the form of unlimited in-bound leads at no additional cost other than the commission cut.

 

[goillini52]

Leads can easily be kept to $400/week or less for a F2F agent who works them properly to sell $4-$6K/week in AP. So there is still quite a gap between the F2F at 125% and the telesales at 70%, is there not?

And then there is the telesales platform fee, which I also did not account for in my scenario.

That's "up to" 70%.