Final Rule For Health Insurance Exchanges

[ABC]

If the law stays on the books and funding is available. It could be a huge opportunity for brokers that are willing to work.

The large agencies have written off the small group market and individual.

Which leaves the smaller broker and agents in position to initially handle the migration of people to the exchange.

If we use the Utah model for compensation at $21 per contract per month you can do the math. Everyone with an online presence in a state that is broker friendly should have no problems putting at least 500 contract on the books the first year.

I think it is very realistic for seasoned producers to put a couple of 1000's contracts on an exchange type plan.

These are still big "IF's"

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

If....if there's a $150 flat fee per app and nothing changes, I can and will hit my locality, sign up about 4 by noon, then get back to my business.

 

[pahealthquotes]

If the law stays on the books and funding is available. It could be a huge opportunity for brokers that are willing to work.

The large agencies have written off the small group market and individual.

Which leaves the smaller broker and agents in position to initially handle the migration of people to the exchange.

If we use the Utah model for compensation at $21 per contract per month you can do the math. Everyone with an online presence in a state that is broker friendly should have no problems putting at least 500 contract on the books the first year.

I think it is very realistic for seasoned producers to put a couple of 1000's contracts on an exchange type plan.

These are still big "IF's"

21 per contract per month with G. ISSUE would be extremely attractive first year commish. With the Utah model, is the 21 for the life of the contract? The good news is it does seem they want to work with agents.. for this I'm grateful. I've worked soo hard to build my indy book it would be really hard to swallow loosing it. I'm ramping up my Medicare production but its taking time. What can we do to prepare more for the future? Will the Supreme Court answer our questions or will we be holding our breath till the last minute? Sucks when our future is in someone elses hands.. man I hate that more than anything. Best wishes to all agents.

Joe
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Reminds me a little bit of Geisinger Health System, who is a very good and well-respected carrier in Pa.

Their Network consists of about 40 Counties around Central Pa.
Oh...By the way... You only get paid if they are located in one of 10 counties. So yea...it's tough to sometimes spend an hour on the phone with someone from one of the non-paying counties, because you are working for free.

pretty funny how they wont pay commish in the counties where they are very strong huh.. I sold three the first day it was offered and was later told.. oh we dont pay commission in Centre county. I was soo pissed. Geisinger does have killer rates for Males on med supp throughout PA. Cant be beat right now.

Cheers,
Joe

 

[CHUMPS FROM OXFORD]

That's how I found out. The first few I sold I didn't get paid on. I had no idea it made a difference.

 

[insurehound]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif]As far as the Exchange is concerned, it is here. In California as an example, the California Health Benefit Exchange has their Board of Directors in place, as well as their Executive Director, Peter Lee. Peter has had much experience in administering California's previous exchange, PacAdvantage. Therefore Peter is well aware of the value and market presence that brokers can and will bring to the Exchange. In Colorado there are several insurance industry executives that are on the Board of Directors for the Colorado Exchange. The Exchanges will operate with grants from HHS using federal funds. Each state's Exchange will utilize those funds in different time frames, depending on the makeup of their staff and other varying factors. However, in all states, the grants are limited, are for specific amounts, and there are no additional grants anticipated in the future. Therefore, the Exchanges will need to operate in as effective a manner as possible, and focus on those most needy in the marketplace. Many of those who may be early or initial enrollees may be those who already meet financial guidelines to qualify for public assistance now, but are not currently enrolled. Many others will most likely be those that will qualify for low income subsidies and enroll on an individual basis. One thing is certain, for the Exchanges to remain financially viable after the 'grants' are exhausted they will need to have brokers and agents bringing clean, profitable employer business into the Exchange. Therefore, even though we really don't know the parameters by which the Exchanges will operate as of yet, they will need to fairly involve the broker community to help them accomplish their goals of success.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif] Here's part of email from a GA in California addressing Brokers' concerns on the Exchanges. I do not agree with it. We can speculate on what our role will be in the Exchanges all day long. And even if we are allowed to be a part of it, like many have said, there are many "ifs" such as what we will be compensated. IMO, California is not a Broker/Agent friendly state and will make it difficult or unprofitable for Brokers and Agents to stay in the game. I can hear it now, "we'll give you a whole $50 per Group you bring us". And when brokers and agents complain, we will be blammed for being "too greedy". But again, all specualtion.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif]Good luck to you all. I am planning for the worse but hoping for the best. [/FONT]

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

NAIC looking for comments regarding on how the exchanges can make money:

http://www.naic.org/documents/committees_b_exchanges_exposures_financing_the_exchange.pdf

 

[agentinsure]

It's looking good to me..........they can't be successful without us. Like in any crash, the weak are weeded out, the strongest survive and gain larger market share in the turnaround. Congrats to those who survived!

Your really smoking the hopium now arent you? It's funny how agents tell themselves how necessary they are. Look at the stock investment world of 20 years ago, there are a lot of brokers (were brokers) who once made a good living buying and selling. I remember when 30 buck a hundred share was a discount commission, now I can buy a 1000 shares for $10 and never have to speak with a soul.

 

[Yagents]

Look at the stock investment world of 20 years ago, there are a lot of brokers (were brokers) who once made a good living buying and selling. I remember when 30 buck a hundred share was a discount commission, now I can buy a 1000 shares for $10 and never have to speak with a soul.

Bad example buddy. Brokers turned into fee based financial planners. Stock trade commissions turned into mutual fund commissions. Low barriers to entry brought more investors, increasing the demand for financial advice. Advisers make more money today than 20 yrs ago.

I see the same thing happening to health insurance:
GI and subsidies lower the barriers to get insured. More people enter the market increasing need for agents. If exchange commissions are paltry, a fee based model will emerge.

 

[somarco]

If exchange commissions are paltry, a fee based model will emerge.

You are not the first to suggest it.

Personally, I don't see it happening.

 

[agentinsure]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif]As far as the Exchange is concerned, it is here. In California as an example, the California Health Benefit Exchange has their Board of Directors in place, as well as their Executive Director, Peter Lee. Peter has had much experience in administering California's previous exchange, PacAdvantage. Therefore Peter is well aware of the value and market presence that brokers can and will bring to the Exchange. In Colorado there are several insurance industry executives that are on the Board of Directors for the Colorado Exchange. The Exchanges will operate with grants from HHS using federal funds. Each state's Exchange will utilize those funds in different time frames, depending on the makeup of their staff and other varying factors. However, in all states, the grants are limited, are for specific amounts, and there are no additional grants anticipated in the future. Therefore, the Exchanges will need to operate in as effective a manner as possible, and focus on those most needy in the marketplace. Many of those who may be early or initial enrollees may be those who already meet financial guidelines to qualify for public assistance now, but are not currently enrolled. Many others will most likely be those that will qualify for low income subsidies and enroll on an individual basis. One thing is certain, for the Exchanges to remain financially viable after the 'grants' are exhausted they will need to have brokers and agents bringing clean, profitable employer business into the Exchange. Therefore, even though we really don't know the parameters by which the Exchanges will operate as of yet, they will need to fairly involve the broker community to help them accomplish their goals of success.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif] Here's part of email from a GA in California addressing Brokers' concerns on the Exchanges. I do not agree with it. We can speculate on what our role will be in the Exchanges all day long. And even if we are allowed to be a part of it, like many have said, there are many "ifs" such as what we will be compensated. IMO, California is not a Broker/Agent friendly state and will make it difficult or unprofitable for Brokers and Agents to stay in the game. I can hear it now, "we'll give you a whole $50 per Group you bring us". And when brokers and agents complain, we will be blammed for being "too greedy". But again, all specualtion.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri","sans-serif]Good luck to you all. I am planning for the worse but hoping for the best. [/FONT]

I think i understand what your saying, and if so it leads to me consider this; the feds will require biz to pay a penalty if they do not offer insurance. The penalty will be much less than annual premium. I ve been looking at defined contribution as a way to a biz owner's heart and pocket book, you might be excluded from writing the health covg, but you might be able to lead them down another path to get the health benefits covered at greatly reduced costs, enabling you to supplant some supplemental covg/benefits and earn their business. Att, IBM and several other corps have already have spoken of dropping their employer health plans and simply paying the penalty, which is allowed in the bill as passed, but will also in my opinion be the achilles heel which absolutely sinks the whole thing if its not changed. After all, what business person in his right mind would not opt out for the lower penalty and dump all his employees onto the state exchange?