Continental Life

[somarco]

It's not fair at all to try to compare them to MOO.

I am not comparing them to MOO. What I am saying is the way they are approaching the business they will be handing out stiff rate increases within 2 yrs.

I have seen this kind of approach before and it won't last.

You clearly don't have any idea how to properly manage a block of business to make it last.

 

[senior-advisor-indiana]

You and I are of the same belief.

They lowered rates in GA by 28% to put them near the bottom of the market. Their most competitive rates are at age 80 and up.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to know this party won't last.

The folks that jumped on this wagon are probably some of the same ones that loaded up on the plan N give away with MOO & Gerber. Remind me, how did that work out?

It has worked out very well for me....
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I'm pretty sure they all let you write up to 3 month out.

Cigna won't......................

 

[GreenSky]

I am not comparing them to MOO. What I am saying is the way they are approaching the business they will be handing out stiff rate increases within 2 yrs.

I have seen this kind of approach before and it won't last.

You clearly don't have any idea how to properly manage a block of business to make it last.

We have it so much better in CA for Med Supps. Because of the birthday rule I can move anyone with a current supplement (except U65 with ESRD) into the same or lesser plan once a year.

I'm seeing a 79 year old client whose birthday is next week. I put him with Family Life (AIMC) two years ago but his Plan F is now $318. AARP is $230. I never even asked him what his health is like now.

I can't help wonder how I would manage a book of business if I had to give a crap about rate increases.

Rick

 

[pbbaseball]

that does it, i'm moving to CA!

yep, seen the super lowball attained age pricing do the same thing for every company over the last 15 yrs... it's not just MoO

 

[GreenSky]

that does it, i'm moving to CA!

It's not that easy. As the person who finished 3rd in the balloting for CA Insurance Commissioner 2 years ago, I have been charged with the responsibility of licensing "new" agents.

You need to have something to offer the good citizens of California. 10 bills with the picture of a president (I'll let you know which one) handed to me usually will be what you have to offer.

Rick

 

[Tahoe Ray]

that does it, i'm moving to CA!

Thank you for paying your fair share...

Capitol Alert: High-income Californians may pay nation's highest tax rate

 

[somarco]

We have it so much better in CA for Med Supps. Because of the birthday rule I can move anyone with a current supplement (except U65 with ESRD) into the same or lesser plan once a year.

I'm seeing a 79 year old client whose birthday is next week. I put him with Family Life (AIMC) two years ago but his Plan F is now $318. AARP is $230. I never even asked him what his health is like now.

I can't help wonder how I would manage a book of business if I had to give a crap about rate increases.

That does make it nice, and (I suppose) a bit easier to manage your block.

I would imagine it also is much easier for other agents to snipe your business if you are not on top of things.

yep, seen the super lowball attained age pricing do the same thing for every company over the last 15 yrs... it's not just MoO

I haven't been in the Medicare market that long, but when you see carriers doing something incredibly stupid you know it is going to blow up eventually.

In the 70's and 80's we had carriers paying 18% interest on annuities. Most of those carriers are gone.

Manhattan Life wrote cheap group term life insurance with $500,000 guaranteed issue on some very small groups. They lost their reinsurance and got burned on that deal.

Several individual major med and small group carriers offered multi-year rate guarantees. Penn Mutual wrote small group with a 3 year rate guarantee. It was great while it lasted but then blew up on them when the guarantees expired.

Some agents are constantly looking for the hot deal and go on a pillage and burn campaign to write as much business as possible with the hot hand. It that is the way they want to run their business, that is fine.

With a little more than 2 years in the Medigap business, about a third of my new apps are coming from referrals. Over the past 2 months I wrote 4 apps on referrals by someone that I was unable to write because they had health problems and could not pass underwriting. Over my career I have discovered that often I will get referrals from someone that never bought from me but appreciated the information and time I took to explain things.

When clients follow my advice, they rarely have to make changes in their coverage. Some of my major medical clients have been on the same plan with the same carrier for over 5 years. They could have changed if they wanted, but there was no need.

The Medigap cycle is no different. Low rates and high commissions spell trouble at some point.

 

[medsuptage]

The folks that jumped on this wagon are probably some of the same ones that loaded up on the plan N give away with MOO & Gerber. Remind me, how did that work out?

I am not comparing them to MOO. What I am saying is the way they are approaching the business they will be handing out stiff rate increases within 2 yrs.

I have seen this kind of approach before and it won't last.

You clearly don't have any idea how to properly manage a block of business to make it last.

The Medigap cycle is no different. Low rates and high commissions spell trouble at some point.

What you are doing is comparing the agents that wrote Plan N GI because they could make a quick buck, with agents who are writing Cont life because it's competitive. Which is a very bold and stubborn claim. They are not one in the same.

Your comment on me not knowing how to make a book of business last is even more ridiculous then the first. You can't come up with a valid reason or legitimate example, so you resort to personal attacks.

Every example you listed in your last post attempting to refer to high premium increases or company failures, doesn't correlate at all to Continental Life.

Your idea of doing something "stupid". Lowing premiums to gain market share. They are about 10-15% less then most carriers in GA, I sell in GA. So even if they have a huge rate increase, they'd have to have a 20-25% rate increase next year to off set other carriers rate increases and not be competitive anymore. They would literally have to pull a mutual of Omaha on us to lose that market. Cont life has never done that.

Their premiums aren't ridiculously low, they are competitive, and their commissions are not high, they have average commissions. They don't pay "HIGH" commissions. Their underwriting is not loose either, they're actually really strict. They pay full comp on GI, but if you put U/W on plan G and N it's not a big deal.

And your most renown carrier that you put "almost all of your business with" New Era. They're fantastic 65-80, at 80+ they are worse then MOO, all rate increases aside, just based on age alone they go up over 120+ dollars a year every year 80 and beyond. $175 at 80, 225 at 85.

It all works it's self out. Every company has it's niche markets.


Anyway, I'm not here to argue with you Somarco. I just don't particularly care for personal attacks, with no merit or substance.

 

[jdeasy]

^^Somarco has this thing about AmCon. I don't know what it is but he made the same arguments with me about them raising rates some months ago that he is making now.

Of course he said I didn't understand the business either.

 

[somarco]

CLI is not the same carrier it was before Aetna purchased them. Same can be said for AMS when purchased by GR, and later GR purchased by UHC after Pat Rooney died.

Carrriers that subjectively and arbitrarily lower rates to gain market share, encourage GI business with low rates and high commissions, and especially if they are mostly competitive at older ages will crash and burn.

I have managed very large blocks of business for carriers in the past and seen what happens. I really don't care if anyone buys my argument or not. CLI will be raising rates 20%+ within 2 years if they maintain their current market plan.

GI Medigap business has 130%+ loss ratio. The only way to maintain rates is to offset with a significant amount of underwritten business.

Yes, I do place most of my business with New Era, and yes, they are not competitive above age 75 - 80. So what? That business is generally short lived and very expensive if the policies stay on the books longer than 3 years.

A carrier will do well if they properly price and underwrite ages 67 - 75 or so to give them a balance against T65 entries.

New Era pays a lower commission than most anyone, pays $25 on GI business and half commission on T65. Because of that many agents won't write that business with them.

Because of that I have very little competition.

Because of that they have had increases of 9%, 6% and 6% in my state the last 3 years which is less than anyone else. Because of that no one snipes my business. Because of that no one complains about their rate increase.

Everyone is happy.

Agents that want to play games with themselves and their clients are just setting themselves up to lose business when I come along. I take a lot of business away from MOO (a hot carrier from a few years ago) and AARP/UHC.

I expect I will be doing the same with CLI and AFLAC policyholders in the next 12 - 18 months. Keep selling that junk, it just makes my life easier. I feast on agents that don't know what they are doing.