Non-profit Ins Companies and AM Best Ratings

[scagnt83]

So did you see those rate increases that MedAmerica is requesting across the country based upon age? They are pretty steep increases. I don't want to say, "Oh to be young again!" with them.

Based upon all material evidence when I posted, the statements were true. I dont know the exact policy series that is being affected. I would be highly surprised if it is the same that just received the increases increases we were discussing.

Hind sight is 20/20. You are trying to validate your previous statements but you do not have the facts to do so.
MA historically has not had out of the norm increases when compared to all the other major players (as you suggested they did).
You gave advice to a prospective buyer that was factually incomplete. You implied that MA has had higher cumulative increases when in fact in the majority of states, MA has had lower cumulative increases.

But in all fairness, MA policies probably had a bit higher premium to start with for comparable benefits. So in actuality they are both probably about the same now if you broke it down to a "dollar per benefit" ratio.

So that brings me back to my previous statement in which I said that both are good companies and good policies.

 

[Arthur Rudnick]

csalter.......

Keep in mind that the increases that MedAmerica is filing for does not necessarily mean that each state's DOI will approve the full amount.

Upon review of the company's request, states have the right to approve the entire amount, reduce the requested hike or dent the increase altogether.

It will be many months before the final decisions are made.

 

[csalter]

Based upon all material evidence when I posted, the statements were true. I dont know the exact policy series that is being affected. I would be highly surprised if it is the same that just received the increases increases we were discussing.

Hind sight is 20/20. You are trying to validate your previous statements but you do not have the facts to do so.
MA historically has not had out of the norm increases when compared to all the other major players (as you suggested they did).
You gave advice to a prospective buyer that was factually incomplete. You implied that MA has had higher cumulative increases when in fact in the majority of states, MA has had lower cumulative increases.

But in all fairness, MA policies probably had a bit higher premium to start with for comparable benefits. So in actuality they are both probably about the same now if you broke it down to a "dollar per benefit" ratio.

So that brings me back to my previous statement in which I said that both are good companies and good policies.

I don't give advice in this area as I do not have expertise in this field. I only give observations. I gave an observation. I never said anything about cumuative increase. In fact I said that they "request" rate increases that are high. I stated an observation. I was not implying or suggesting anything other than what I saw.

I also stated that MedAmerica was a good policy as I really looked hard at it for myself. I don't think there is anything wrong with their policy. I like the cash monthly component to the policy that allows you to use the money as you see fit.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

csalter.......

Keep in mind that the increases that MedAmerica is filing for does not necessarily mean that each state's DOI will approve the full amount.

Upon review of the company's request, states have the right to approve the entire amount, reduce the requested hike or dent the increase altogether.

It will be many months before the final decisions are made.

Seems as if many of the states just give a rubber stamp. I have seen very few of them that alter the request.