Court Denies Netquote Claim for Injuction Against MostChoice

Why do it in the first time...the one that suffers are the agents that get the BS lead and wastes time......the time that was wasted by agents should be part of the settlement with you doing community service .....like giving out condoms or something like that....

I don't know if you can call .098% of total lead volume massive, but as I have said before, we would never investigate using this method ever again.
 
If you felt Netquote was engaging in unfair business practices I guess you'd have to look at some legal angle. Personally I wouldn't imagine why you'd care what they were doing.

NAHU is the premier association for health insurance agents. On their site they tout 20,000 agents. Far more agent, when comparing will join them instead of me.

Hey...maybe they don't have 20,000 agents! Maybe I can....wow, who cares. Why do I care about NAHU, PIA or any other association. All I care about is building my business.

I think your lesson learned is leave Netquote alone and focus on MostChoice.

Do you mean a legal angle like this?

MostChoice Claim Against Netquote for False Advertising

We conducted the investigation for purposes of a lawsuit against them. I don't file lawsuits without proof. I needed proof they didn't have 20,000 agents. Above is the second amended complaint.

What's your angle? Why do you care so much?
 
I'll be there the night before - 21st. From what I understand about Atlanta traffic if I leave the night before I should make it by 9am the next morning.

I can't imagine living there, but so many people love it. Been there once when I was in college. That was enough for me. I can only imagine it worse than before.

Have a great time!
 
Rebecca Tushnet, the Georgetown University Law Professor with the popular 43(b) blog, has now posted a followup to her original blog on this case. Thankfully, she is more kind to MostChoice this time around (hard not to be more kind than that first blog of hers!) I hope this is a sign that the truth is now starting to come out.

She did a good job of summarizing what I think are the most relevant parts of this ruling to agents who buy leads. Some of the points below have certainly been talked about a good bit in this forum. The quality of affiliate program generated leads has been a topic on this board even before this case began! Here is the quote from her blog:

"The trial evidence tended to support the claim that MostChoice's leads were better. NetQuote uses affiliate leads, and those tend to be poorer quality. By contrast, MostChoice's leads during the relevant time period did not include affiliate leads, which the court saw as support for the "filtering" claim, because selecting the source of a lead can be viewed as a filtering process. Moreover, NetQuote sent each lead to a larger number of agents than MostChoice, diluting any single agent's chance of closing a sale. The market price of MostChoice leads was higher, which the court also considered evidence that its leads were "better.""

To read the whole blog go here: (BTW, to those not familiar with this case, she's NOT implying that MostChoice sells false leads)

Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log: MostChoice's brags succeed where its false leads don't

If you are interested in seeing the current page that they are actually talking about in the blog, here it is:

Better than Netquote Leads
 
Last edited:
Back
Top