Not from MassMutual
Hancock Announces New Rate Increases
- Thread starter Arthur Rudnick
- Start date
Not from MassMutual
- 10,806
I think the recent decision by Mass to restrict sales to captive agents only is a sign that they are feeling financial pressure from LTCI sales. Or at least a sign that they are worried about being overextended in the future. It will certainly reduce future sales for them id think.
do you realize that mm has the second lowest loss ratio in the LTC insurance industry?
Lol. You will be in for a big surprise in the future.
----------
I think your second point is correct. A company like that is more concerned about maintains their reputation than taking chances.
Or Mass Mutual will reopen brokerage channels when it has new gender based pricing in effect.
----------
Someone needs to explain to me the reason why John Hancock aggressively requests rate increases every single year while other companies that also sold LTC insurance either never have needed to raise rates (Mass Mutual) or have been quite modest (Allianz). Does any company request more increases than John Hancock?
- 10,806
Mass mutual and the other big mutuals are proactive, not reactive like GW or JH.
Loss Ratio means nothing in the face of Intra-Company Profit Margin Comparisons & Projections. If they only get a 2:1 return on LTCI, but they get a 4:1 or 5:1 return on other lines of business... why keep investing in LTCI? They have a duty to policy holders to invest wisely and maximize ROI.
----------
You must know something I dont. It would be nice if that happened... assuming its still competitive..
Mass mutual and the other big mutuals are proactive, not reactive like GW or JH.
Loss Ratio means nothing in the face of Intra-Company Profit Margin Comparisons & Projections. If they only get a 2:1 return on LTCI, but they get a 4:1 or 5:1 return on other lines of business... why keep investing in LTCI? They have a duty to policy holders to invest wisely and maximize ROI.
----------
You must know something I dont. It would be nice if that happened... assuming its still competitive..
i still think that mm stopped the brokerage channel because they were upset that NGL got the new lifecare product and they didn't.
Zero relevance.
- Thread starter
- #19
Arthur Rudnick
Guru
- 1,652
originally posted by ltcadviser
The explanation is very simple:
Because they can!
The explanation is very simple:
Because they can!
why zero relevance?
my guess is that during the negotiations mm wanted too big a piece of the pie and lifecare looked for another partner instead of giving in to mm.
i have no inside knowledge... this is just conjecture.
Similar threads
