Final Expense Phone Qualifying Is Working

[Josh]

You seem to have a lot of energy on this issue. How come?

That's a good question. A part of it is because I talk to a lot of agents about their marketing every week and I think it's ridiculous how many companies (and recruiters) are telling people it's perfectly legal to do something that is so clearly illegal. The last thing I'd want to see happen to a new agent is for them to buy a stack of leads, go to work then, and then get investigated by the DOI and lose their license. All because they innocently enough believed what a recruiter and/or lead company told them. I realize there is some degree of accountability on the individual, but when an agency licensed in multiple states is telling a new agent about this great lead program and why it's legal, when it's completely illegal, I think it's important to help look out for them.

 

[pcbinsurance]

Keep fighting the good fight Josh! You're a good man.

 

[moonlightandmargaritas]

The last thing I'd want to see happen to a new agent is for them to buy a stack of leads, go to work then, and then get investigated by the DOI and lose their license.

Lose their license? Seems a tad extreme. OK, let's think about his for a minute...

If it's a felony criminal beef, I would agree that someone's license may be in jeopardy. Is there any jurisdiction where this is considered a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor?

Worst case scenario, it's a civil beef, while perhaps resulting in a fine, would be no danger in someone losing their license.

 

[theinsuranceman]

Production level in AP and apps is lower than normal, although I really think I need a few more weeks to get a good feel of what to expect.

I think it's less stressful overall. My approach has changed from the glad-handing Joe Smiley yet straightforward approach, to the "I'm shooting you straight and I expect you to tell me NO if you're not interested, OK?" approach.

I spend a lot more time on the phone, and probably do an equivalent amount of presentations on the phone as I'd do setting a basic, no-qualification appointment, maybe 3-5 a day.

What's fantastic is that, for some reason, there's much less bullshitting and talking about fishing trophies on the wall; if I get someone who's interested into a conversation, I can generally qualify them in 15-20 minutes, with them knowing price, coverage, and terms, and how my programs are different from CP, MoO, AARP, etc.

Then I suggest a meeting face-to-face to wrap up the program; most set the appointment. If they're squirming about an appointment at that point, I'm telling them I'm on my way to hang up the phone as I've explained everything and it sounds like they're not interested? Or I just politely request them to tell me NO if they just don't want it.

When I do the appointment, it lasts about an hour, as opposed to the 1:45 to 2:00 hours. The appointment is MUCH more relaxed -- that's when I like hearing about my client's life, AFTER I know they're going to do business with me (because that's why I'm showing up and they know it).

The DOWNSIDE would be that you can't do as much of a full review of the prospect's present plans. Like JD and others suggest, there is definitely VALUE just getting into the door and taking a looksy at what could be replaced. I'm planning on tweaking my presentation to do more fact-finding and maybe open up replacement business more, as I feel like I could be leaving that business on the table in my current qualifying method.

PS: I fill up my gas tank once a week now instead of 2-3 times a week, and don't have to door-knock.

AP may be lower but your expenses are also lower. What matters is how much profit did you make per hour with each method.

You are half-way to doing FE tele-sales. You see the time savings and expense savings already. This would be even greater if you decided to go "all in" with FE tele-sales.

(I still want a crack at your rejected leads).

(Face 2 face appointments of 1:45-2 hours are not necessary.)

 

[rousemark]

My clients are serviced better than most. They call me for service

neighboring farmer talking with Wino's little brother:

"Is your PA home?"

"No Sir, but can I help you? if you need to buy something I know all the prices".

"No, I needed to talk to your PA. Is Wino home?"

"No Sir, he went with Pa. But like I said, I take care of things when Pa is gone. I know all the prices"

"Well, I want to talk to your Pa about Wino getting my daughter pregnant. "

"Oh! You will have to talk to Pa about that. I know he gets $100 for the bull and $50 for the boar but I don't know what he charges for Wino."

 

[Josh]

Lose their license? Seems a tad extreme. OK, let's think about his for a minute...

If it's a felony criminal beef, I would agree that someone's license may be in jeopardy. Is there any jurisdiction where this is considered a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor?

Worst case scenario, it's a civil beef, while perhaps resulting in a fine, would be no danger in someone losing their license.

No, it's not worst case scenario a civil matter, it's a criminal matter.

Paul, I do appreciate your skepticism and commitment to keeping people on here honest, but what I'm suggesting as a possibility is not far fetched and here is why:

Some of the geniuses that are telling agents this is ok are promoting it as a method for soliciting the sale of Medicare supplements. Let's say, and this is by no means a stretch, that the agent also is contracted with some Medicare Advantage plans. Of the 10,000 calls at a clip they're making, it's entirely possible that some secret shopper will be called, respond, and will end up documenting how they were robocalled for a Medicare Advantage product. If you have any level of involvement with MA plans or how CMS is operating it's entirely possible for an agent to lose their license as a result of the disciplinary fallout from something like that, at a minimum they may never be able to contract with a MA company again and have limited options with other carriers.

We can talk odds off this happening all day long and it may very well be an insignificant likelihood that it would follow the chain of events above, but if you're robocalling 10,000 numbers at a clip knowing full well there is a fine of up to $16,000 attached to each call, that's a considerable risk.

If someone is robocalling strictly for burial insurance then I think it unlikely they'd ever have a situation where CMS would be on their back, but in the Medicare world they're painting a target on their back. Hell, a lot of seniors think it's illegal to cold call them about Medicare supplements when it is perfectly legal.

Again, because it warrants repeating, this isn't just a civil issue between the agent and the person(s) called, it's a criminal act.

 

[rousemark]

Again, because it warrants repeating, this isn't just a civil issue between the agent and the person(s) called, it's a criminal act.

I think Paul was saying it was a civil issue as far as the FTC involvement is concerned, not the person being called. If the only penalty that can be enforced by the FTC is a fine, then it is considered a civil case. Are there any provisions for incarceration for violations?

Here are some FTC actions

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/donotcall/mediacenter.html

 

[Josh]

The FTC can seek incarceration. I'm unclear about the mechanics of how that works, but it's not without precedent.

 

[somarco]

The FTC can seek incarceration. I'm unclear about the mechanics of how that works, but it's not without precedent.

 

[jdeasy]

AP may be lower but your expenses are also lower. What matters is how much profit did you make per hour with each method.

You are half-way to doing FE tele-sales. You see the time savings and expense savings already. This would be even greater if you decided to go "all in" with FE tele-sales.

(I still want a crack at your rejected leads).

(Face 2 face appointments of 1:45-2 hours are not necessary.)

I don't know if that's true about expenses being lower. Maybe some are, but the lead bill is certainly high enough to make up that.

So what If I save $50 on gas and spend $200 more on leads? I'm certainly not ahead that way.