Med Supp Carriers?

[G.Gordon]

If you want rate stability stay away from AIMC companies like Sterling and Admiral. They have very shallow pockets and it doesn't take long for them to take huge rate increases.

Also... they have started including that clause that states if you help one of your clients leave Admiral/Sterling you lose all future commissions and/or get charged $250/case. Be carefull.

My "go-to" companies in MO are United of Omaha, American National, and Christian Fidelity. All large companies with deep pockets to handle some claims action without scrambling for the rate up button.

If UW is getting uncompetitive in your area you can be Mutual will be rolling out United of Omaha soon. It's their strategy.

 

[Cenla Agent]

It looks as if United World is pricing themselves out of the Georgia market. Based on some comparisons, it looks like Admiral, Lincoln Heritage and RNA are more competitive. Any of you use these carriers? If so, any thoughts? Pros and cons?

Who is your FMO for these carriers and what is your commission?

Thanks for the input.

My guess is that United of Omaha is rolling out soon in place of United World. It's what Mutual of Omaha is doing in other states.

 

[craig_ritter]

To All:

I take pride in the services my company offers the Independant Senior Market agent, so I'm very upset to read the comments above. Please accept my public apology and be assured I will address this.

Specifically, Sman, my stance on Agent's Commissions is to be as transparent as possible. My philosophy is to offer the maximum "street" commission the company will allow and these levels are available for download from my website 24/7. I will offer 1% to 2% more based on production (generally $50,000+ or levels that meet the company's criteria), but I don't have these commissions loaded into my website for download at the present time and these need to be manually sent. I'd be curious to know which companies were lower so that I can re-evaluate what I offer as "street". I'm developing an enhancement which will allow me to customize the commission level on an agent by agent basis (based on prior production), but that is a ways away.

M&M: I don't recall getting your e-mail. Like many of you, I get 200+ e-mails/day, however, I pretty consistently answer them quickly (including evenings and weekends for urgent ones). I'm travelling for a few days and can call you when I get back.

I appreciate the feedback (even negative).

Craig

 

[sman]

Craig,

I have only heard positive things about your agency. I am actually contracted through you for one carrier currently. Not a med supp carrier, though. I personally would love to find one agency to deal with and not have multiple FMO relationships, but that just doesn't seem possible.

I realize when I called your agency that I'm not the only agent they are dealing with. But I do expect someone to honor what they say. If at 9 a.m. they state, "I'll be sending those contracts over in just a moment", and I have to call back around 1:00 p.m. to find out where they are, I figure I'm not that important. In addition, I emailed someone and never heard back from them (at the time I'm writing this I still haven't heard back from them and I emailed it on Monday).

As for the carrier that you offered a lower commission on, it was Lincoln Heritage. On their non-select supplement you offered 17%. The other FMO offered 19%. When I contacted your office again and explained this, I was then sent over the higher contract. Here's my issue with that. If you can offer the higher contract, then offer it on a regular basis. If that contract has production requirements, then maybe your marketing people should be trained to ask a few questions. I'm not an agent that requires any hand holding from an FMO. I just need the best commission possible. When I get contracting paperwork from two different FMO's and one is offering a higher commission and I find out the other one COULD offer the higher commission and doesn't, that raises questions in my mind. Maybe one day we will do more business together, but I have already submitted my contracting paperwork through the FMO that gave me the higher commission to start with. Best of luck to you.

 

[dandan]

I use AIMC for Lincoln Heritage and RNA, I have had no problems with either company.

 

[sman]

Thanks dandan. Glad to hear you haven't had any problems with either of those carriers. After UW's rate increase, these carriers will be more competitive from a rate standpoint AND a commission standpoint. I'll actually get a raise on every case I replace.

 

[G.Gordon]

I use AIMC for Lincoln Heritage and RNA, I have had no problems with either company.

I've not used LH, but I'm sure they are fine. What I was refering to was the size and ability of the companies AIMC brings to the table. It seems, in MO anyway, that they haven't brought out a company in five years that can handle more than a year without serious rate ups. At the same time the non-AIMC companies such as mentioned above can go two or three years without increases and when they have one it's minimal.

Antex 2-3 years.... 3.5%
Christian Fidelity.... 2.5 years... 6%
Mutual of O.... usually 2-3 years on the new products before they have a change ~6-8%

in contrast

RNA... one year... 15%... then 15-25% every six months
Sterling... they've announced so many 15% increases over the past 1.5 years I've lost track
Admiral... weren't even on the street in MO one year and they took a 15%.

 

[Russ]

I've not used LH, but I'm sure they are fine. What I was refering to was the size and ability of the companies AIMC brings to the table. It seems, in MO anyway, that they haven't brought out a company in five years that can handle more than a year without serious rate ups. At the same time the non-AIMC companies such as mentioned above can go two or three years without increases and when they have one it's minimal.

Antex 2-3 years.... 3.5%
Christian Fidelity.... 2.5 years... 6%
Mutual of O.... usually 2-3 years on the new products before they have a change ~6-8%

in contrast

RNA... one year... 15%... then 15-25% every six months
Sterling... they've announced so many 15% increases over the past 1.5 years I've lost track
Admiral... weren't even on the street in MO one year and they took a 15%.

In Florida, Sterling Investors has gone up each of the last 2 years....around 10%.

In Florida, United World goes up almost every year(around 10%). M of O hasn't gone up in awhile(their overdue).

Continental Life hasn't gone up since August 1st, 2007(their overdue).

AARP goes up a small amount(around 5%), every January.

Shenandoah Life was terribly high in Florida before they went under. They were very competitive in Alabama.

 

[sman]

You have to remember that some of the carriers you list just aren't competitive in certain states (or don't even write business in some states). Antex isn't competitive at all in Georgia. Christian Fidelity doesn't write business in Georgia and I say count your blessings if you are only getting 6-8% rate increases from MOO in your state.

Here in Georgia, they went 2 years on the UW product without increasing rates and then it's been double digits the past 3 years. It's been about 40% in 3 years. That's no small pill to swallow. Here in Georgia, RNA came out with new rates in December and it doesn't appear to be too drastic. I happen to have a December 2006 rate sheet from them and a female age 65 for Plan F (in certain zip codes) was $107.87. That same person in December of 2008 is $131.70 (two years older age 67). That's 22% higher. Seems about in line with the rate increases of UW and actually slightly less, at least here in Gerogia.

I think you guys in MO are fortunate to be able to help a client out every year if a carrier gets out of line. Here in Georgia, we have one option for those that don't medically qualify and that's AARP. Plan F is $166.75. I'd love to have an annual guarantee like you have.

I've not used LH, but I'm sure they are fine. What I was refering to was the size and ability of the companies AIMC brings to the table. It seems, in MO anyway, that they haven't brought out a company in five years that can handle more than a year without serious rate ups. At the same time the non-AIMC companies such as mentioned above can go two or three years without increases and when they have one it's minimal.

Antex 2-3 years.... 3.5%
Christian Fidelity.... 2.5 years... 6%
Mutual of O.... usually 2-3 years on the new products before they have a change ~6-8%

in contrast

RNA... one year... 15%... then 15-25% every six months
Sterling... they've announced so many 15% increases over the past 1.5 years I've lost track
Admiral... weren't even on the street in MO one year and they took a 15%.