I thought it was discussed here, that the new regs would basically get rid of the FMOs, and more or less for the agent to direct contract with the carrier?
Medicare agents - 2025 - CMS Rule Changes
- Thread starter sshafran
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #62
It's a beautiful thing to watch the big recruiters beg agents to sign this. Um.... no. Nope nope nope. Go sell something, you talking head....
But will the CO's find a loophole for the fmo's ? Like coding it like their a w-2 ? One thing for sure the little agent gets screwed when it's all said and done . I see Ifg said they did 250 k apps during aep vs 65k last yr . Hell yeah that 48 scope working good . I bet you not more than 5% if agents are getting a scope 48 hrs ahead . Everything's a call in or they approached me immediate soa . I monitor all my apps heavy . I bet I knocked out 25 call center aep apps .But they'll all count those as apps placed for recruiting purposes.
Don, who is lfg?
Innovative financial group out of Wilmington ,Nc . They got downline agencys doing 10-30 k apps during aep . Many have 4-5 call centers . Humana bought them about 18 months ago . Humana just fired the founder .
ssahafran wrote: Or you request a non-resident appointment with them (UHC requires it from FMO) and it takes 3 weeks (and 3 follow up prompts) for them to process...
I had no problem getting a direct contract with UHC 3 yrs. ago when my FMO lost their contract for some unknown (and never explained reason).
Otherwise, I've found the FMO tech platform very useful....providing contracting and appointment support, online quotes, free call vault for all carriers, free CRM service and info on all kinds of products, webinars, in-person AEP roll-outs, etc. I can see where they may continue to provide these services, but at a fee to their agents if CMS gets their way.
Still, this is NOT a good development. I've said all along, if the insurance companies and/or CMS could find a way to eliminate agents, they will. And if FMOs take a big cut in their comp, I have ZERO expectation insurance carriers will start paying agents more if they can avoid it.
I had no problem getting a direct contract with UHC 3 yrs. ago when my FMO lost their contract for some unknown (and never explained reason).
Otherwise, I've found the FMO tech platform very useful....providing contracting and appointment support, online quotes, free call vault for all carriers, free CRM service and info on all kinds of products, webinars, in-person AEP roll-outs, etc. I can see where they may continue to provide these services, but at a fee to their agents if CMS gets their way.
Still, this is NOT a good development. I've said all along, if the insurance companies and/or CMS could find a way to eliminate agents, they will. And if FMOs take a big cut in their comp, I have ZERO expectation insurance carriers will start paying agents more if they can avoid it.
Kb4391
Expert
- 47
I think one of the most interesting part of this whole conversation is hearing how many agents absolutely get nothing from their upline. I've spoken to a couple dozen of the agents that work with me as their POC with their IMO and they are all up in arms against this if it means they lose the service they get and would have to go directly to carriers to resolve problems. I guess we'll see what happens!
I'm all for trying to make changes that benefit the beneficiaries in the end. There are too many bad apples out there with bad business practices, but if anyone thinks for a second that the funding that is paid as administrative fees/marketing to IMO's is actually going to be invested in plan benefits or improving carrier customer service...... good luck. I mean, our government has always been the best example of spending money wisely right?!
I'm all for trying to make changes that benefit the beneficiaries in the end. There are too many bad apples out there with bad business practices, but if anyone thinks for a second that the funding that is paid as administrative fees/marketing to IMO's is actually going to be invested in plan benefits or improving carrier customer service...... good luck. I mean, our government has always been the best example of spending money wisely right?!
NABIP going to bat..........
"A key reason that problems exist in this marketplace is not the lack of existing rules, but CMS's lack of enforcement resources."
----------
If this change goes into effect as currently written, it would unravel the entire existing system of support provided by GAs and FMOs. Limiting FMOs to approximately 15 percent of their current funding would mean that all of these independent companies will no longer be financially viable. Not only would that have a detrimental economic impact – as FMOs are thriving businesses located in every state and employing tens of thousands of people – it would also have a catastrophic impact on the entire Medicare Advantage population.
"A key reason that problems exist in this marketplace is not the lack of existing rules, but CMS's lack of enforcement resources."
----------
If this change goes into effect as currently written, it would unravel the entire existing system of support provided by GAs and FMOs. Limiting FMOs to approximately 15 percent of their current funding would mean that all of these independent companies will no longer be financially viable. Not only would that have a detrimental economic impact – as FMOs are thriving businesses located in every state and employing tens of thousands of people – it would also have a catastrophic impact on the entire Medicare Advantage population.
- Thread starter
- #69
But would it really?
I don't think it would.
FMOs do provide jobs, sure, but so do government contracts overpaying for just about anything else. The IRS provides jobs but I don't want them to continue as is just because of jobs.
FMOs can go away tomorrow and I will not lose any functionality as an agent.
I think what's happened is the overrides have been far far too much . Let's look at Ifg agency's . I know several sub agency's did 5000 plus apps during aep. At even $180 an app override that's $900k of override . I known one particular agency that just throws out marketing money . So all his "overhead" is paid for . So he basically pocketed $900k for doing very little. So for the year he might make $2 mil override in fyc. What about the huge back end override of possibly $80k plus a month . This is basically money paid for by taxpayers . Sure the no more marketing money will cost me but I'll be fine as my book is big now . If they decided to cut comp in 1/2 I'd go to 100% telesales and only work referrals . I'd spend no money on acquiring new clients as its not financially feasible .
Similar threads
