How Competitive Are Foresters & Equitable

[WinoBlues]

Ask Newby what he thinks now. He won't bit you. I have sold Foresters and RNA both. A couple other Faternals as well.

I keep saying I do not whole sale replace them. I choose other options now. I have also sold non guaranteed UL in the 80s. I chose guarantees now. I have no hate for them I just have other options.

Do you do any replacement? Over what $5. Difference in premium.

Look man, I get that you like the company. But it is just a company, not your company. They will kick you to the curb as fast as the next company. Clients first.

Forget everything I have posted and read a couple of the other guys. Then make up your own mind. Do I think Foresters is a huge mistake? No. I just have better choices.

wino,

why don't you read newbys quote rom 2009. He states he was told by the states DOI that there was no need to be concerned about certificates. They stated you should use the normal AM best rating to determine the strenght of an insurance company. Newby even sold some Foresters and RNA policies after that. So where were his concerrns then?

Suggesting Foresters and RNA should be replaced because of their use of certificates is a farce. Its a scare tactic and has no merit.

And suggesting I buy foreign cars because I am self-centered is not the case at all. I buy foreign cars because they last longer, are more reliable are more fun to drive and hold better resale value.

 

[thomasm]

So far the few policies I've written (mostly term) no other agent's knocked on their door to talk with them about life insurance before. My guess is if they got a house full of kids running around and no insurance, I left them in a better place than I found them. Foresters or not! I guess that's how I sleep at night.

 

[Newby]

hey mustslowpitch

why don't you read newbys quote rom 2009. He clearly states he was told by the states DOI that there was no need to be concerned about certificates. They stated you should use the normal AM best rating to determine the strenght of an insurance company. So to answer your question, thats where I got it. Try and keep up. Newby even sold some Foresters and RNA policies after that. So where were his concerns then?

Suggesting Foresters and RNA policies should be replaced because of their use of certificates is a farce. Its a scare tactic and has no merit.

And since your talking about sales ability. If your not smart enough to see the value in selling member benefits you not much of a salesman. Revisit sales 101 or better yet, go sell cars for 6 months. It would due you good. You might actually learn how to sell something

And suggesting I buy foreign cars because I am self-centered is not the case at all. I buy foreign cars because they last longer, are more reliable are more fun to drive and hold better resale value.

Oh wait that was a different thread. nevermind

Everybody just has to make their own decisions on what they are comfortable with. My opinion is that a fraternal is OK to use if they are substantially lower on premium or have an underwriting advantage. If everything else is pretty equal, the guarantees of a policy outweigh the certificate and is a huge advantage.

Talking to an employee of the DOI is just one factor in making your own decision. Basically his stance is that they have had no problem with fraternals going out of business. He even went on to say that AM Best was not a big factor. In his opinion, if the state DOA has approved a company to sell, the agent can sell them. End of story.

Explaining the difference in a certificate and a policy is not a scare tactic. It is just basic facts that you as the agent need to explain.

If one bank had guarantees on their savings account and another bank reserved the right to borrow money out of the depositor's accounts if they had a financial shortfall...I think most depositors would opt for the guarantee. But only if they knew the difference. I don't think throwing in free stuff or donating money to charities would make people feel comfortable with the lessor guarantee. But everything has a tipping point. At some point the reward is stronger than the risk.

I have one fraternal that gives the the members a 25% bonus on their death benefit as a fraternal benefit up to $100,000. That's a pretty strong selling point. If they would allow more variety of applicants and approve more of them that applied, I would offer them more. I think an educated consumer that understands everything would CHOOSE that benefit. I don't think a free will has the same appeal.

But the original question comes back to "Does Foresters have more exposure to replacement than other companies?" my answer is yes. It doesn't come from premiums. It comes from the certificate holders exposure to the Foresters customer service (I have replaced more than one that was already looking to get away from them before I met them), the language in the certificate about what the company can do in the event of default, and often the over promising of the non-guaranteed benefits. I've replaced many of them simply because the applicants were under the impression that they had a critical illness benefit BUT I pointed out they never have it because they were age 68 or older when they applied. Agents that sold hard on that benefit, died on that benefit. Consumers don't like to be strongly promised something that was either a mistake or a lie by the sales rep.

 

[xrac]

Everybody just has to make their own decisions on what they are comfortable with. My opinion is that a fraternal is OK to use if they are substantially lower on premium or have an underwriting advantage. If everything else is pretty equal, the guarantees of a policy outweigh the certificate and is a huge advantage.

Talking to an employee of the DOI is just one factor in making your own decision. Basically his stance is that they have had no problem with fraternals going out of business. He even went on to say that AM Best was not a big factor. In his opinion, if the state DOA has approved a company to sell, the agent can sell them. End of story.

Explaining the difference in a certificate and a policy is not a scare tactic. It is just basic facts that you as the agent need to explain.

If one bank had guarantees on their savings account and another bank reserved the right to borrow money out of the depositor's accounts if they had a financial shortfall...I think most depositors would opt for the guarantee. But only if they knew the difference. I don't think throwing in free stuff or donating money to charities would make people feel comfortable with the lessor guarantee. But everything has a tipping point. At some point the reward is stronger than the risk.

I have one fraternal that gives the the members a 25% bonus on their death benefit as a fraternal benefit up to $100,000. That's a pretty strong selling point. If they would allow more variety of applicants and approve more of them that applied, I would offer them more. I think an educated consumer that understands everything would CHOOSE that benefit. I don't think a free will has the same appeal.

But the original question comes back to "Does Foresters have more exposure to replacement than other companies?" my answer is yes. It doesn't come from premiums. It comes from the certificate holders exposure to the Foresters customer service (I have replaced more than one that was already looking to get away from them before I met them), the language in the certificate about what the company can do in the event of default, and often the over promising of the non-guaranteed benefits. I've replaced many of them simply because the applicants were under the impression that they had a critical illness benefit BUT I pointed out they never have it because they were age 68 or older when they applied. Agents that sold hard on that benefit, died on that benefit. Consumers don't like to be strongly promised something that was either a mistake or a lie by the sales rep.

Good post Newby. I think you have the correct view on fraternals. If there is an advantage use them otherwise stick with a true policy.

 

[Newby]

Good post Newby. I think you have the correct view on fraternals. If there is an advantage use them otherwise stick with a true policy.

Thank you XRAC. I don't see myself as "against" fraternals. I think I'm open minded.

I just sell the company that I would choose for myself if I were in the customer's shoes. The customer is never going to understand all the details the way we do. That's we're we bring value.

 

[nfl72]

Dear ThomasM,

I am writing this letter to you today to help get your mind right. You recently asked if having Equitable and Foresters in your toolbag was enough and if they stood the risk of being easily replaced.

The answer is no and no. If you want to be able to put your best foot forward you need to pick up a few others. SNL will help with older age clients and also will take other non traditional methods of payment. They also don't require a PHI, which sometimes can be helpful. Aetna and Vantis might also be good to have in your holster. For the client long on meds Aetna will do good as long as they can answer the health questions truthfully. Vantis has great rates for people with major health issues, along with flexible payment plans.

In your origional question you stated you liked building value by selling the free member benefits. That is a good thing and I commend you on your actions. It does and will add value and I believe will also increase your persistancy as well. It also helps if you encourage your clients or customers, which ever you prefer to call them, to take part in the fun family gatherings. For once they have they will think a little harder about replacing their certificate that offers free benefits for a policy that doesn't.

The risk of your Foresters policies being re-written is not nearly what some of the other posts would have you believe as long as your placing people there that belong. If you have a 75 MT and he wants a larger rather than a smaller policy you be better to send him elsewhere as Foresters is pretty pricey when tobacco use is involved. I had a client last week who really liked the benefits so I sent the FNT to Foresters and her spouse a MT to SNL. They got the best of both worlds. He got a great price on his premium and he also gets to participate in the free member benefits his wife has at Foresters.

Bottom line is this, keep using Foresters if you wish and keep building value. Also try and pick up a few more bullets.

Sincerely,

NFL


ps pleae note that from time to time you will have some issues with underwriting. It is a given so just bite the bullet and bare it for as long as you can. when and if it becomes intollerable, jump ship! you won't be the first!

 

[GoCubsGo]

Good post Newby. I sold a ton of Foresters years ago. Customer service was much better, member benefits had the Critical Illness benefit which I though was big but I was dealing with younger families (mortgage protection) and they could also use the Orphan & scholarship benefits. For the Senior crowd the benefits are not worth much to them and you add the lack of guaranty with a certificate, bad customer service and it being a foreign company when seniors tend to be a more patriotic bunch, they are not worth it.

But TO EACH THEIR OWN. nfl has stated his idea of the pro's and several stated the con's. Everyone else can make up their own mind. If you are comfortable with someone coming in right after you sold the Foresters and pointing out these con's and not being able to steal your business then have fun with Foresters.

Were are just beating a dead horse here.

 

[nfl72]

I can see both sides of the fence to a certain degree..

Now tell me fastpitch, is Foresters so bad now that you felt compelled to go back and replace the tons of business you sent to them a year ago? Or are you only threatening to replace the sales of other agents?

 

[jdeasy]

I don't know about Equitable but they don't seem to be competitive. I don't "feel" them out there.

For the last year Foresters has not been a player. Not so much because of being a fraternal but because of just who they are. I've been contracted with them for 8 years and never cared for them but I would their products in spite of the management when it was in my client's interest.

I've only had one contestable claim with them and they did not pay it. it took them 10 months also to decide to not pay. I've had a handful of non contestable claims with them and they were paid fairly quickly but slower any other company I have pay non contestable claims. Most of those are assigned at the funeral home so that's a really a non issue.

Their member benefits are nothing to brag about so I don't. I did almost lose a couple of clients because of the hassle they got when trying to use the legal aid.

I write whatever is in the best interest of my client and that I can get through underwriting. That has been Foresters one time since the changes of last July.

I have replaced some Foresters and I will use the fraternal against them. I agree with Newby on the fraternal thing. I have no problem using them but all things being equal I will use a policy over a certificate.

I also agree with nfl that using that alone is a scare tactic when talking about large A rated fraternals. Now a small fraternal that lower than an A rating or even not rated at all as some of them are, I would be scared to use them so it would be a scare tactic to say that, but a true scare tactic.

Maybe with other companies making changes then Foresters will fall back into the mix? If they do I will just hold my nose and write them again.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I can see both sides of the fence to a certain degree..

Now tell me fastpitch, is Foresters so bad now that you felt compelled to go back and replace the tons of business you sent to them a year ago? Or are you only threatening to replace the sales of other agents?

It was YEARS ago, around nine, so no It would not be in their best interest to change them. I have never sold a Foresters SIWL. If it was in their best interest I would change them. I started in insurance with NASE and Mega Life. Too stupid to know better. After selling a bunch I realized it was not a good product (health insurance) and left Mega. I hooked up with a local broker and switched as many as I could to BCBS. Killed me financially but it had to be done. This was in 2001. I will always tried to do whats right. I have replaced other agents Foresters business. No apologizes.