- 10,806
I thought I was blocked??
You are welcome to respond with facts and logic. None of this is personal David.
You are welcome to respond with facts and logic. None of this is personal David.
Ohio National - Demutualization
- Thread starter pfg1
- Start date
- 11,502
- 10,806
It sounds like you need a hug David. Again, none of this was personal. Facts are facts.
Professionals are supposed to care about factually correct information. Clients certainly do.
You are still welcome to respond to my posts with facts, logic, reason, and respect.
Professionals are supposed to care about factually correct information. Clients certainly do.
You are still welcome to respond to my posts with facts, logic, reason, and respect.
Last edited:
- 11,502
I'm leaving the forum. Private messages are turned off.
If you want to contact me or reach me, join the forum's Facebook group here:
Professional Life Insurance Agent Discussion
We have DOZENS of MDRT Top of the Table agents and many other subject matter experts. The group has over 13,000 agents with decent conversations and engagement.
I will not remain where there's a massive narcissist and remain where I'm just 'tolerated'. Due to ONE poster, and his ability to continue to poke at me, and my seeming inability to let it go... I will simply leave the forum.
As master coach Jim Ruta says - go where you are celebrated, not just merely tolerated.
F*** you Tyler.
If you want to contact me or reach me, join the forum's Facebook group here:
Professional Life Insurance Agent Discussion
We have DOZENS of MDRT Top of the Table agents and many other subject matter experts. The group has over 13,000 agents with decent conversations and engagement.
I will not remain where there's a massive narcissist and remain where I'm just 'tolerated'. Due to ONE poster, and his ability to continue to poke at me, and my seeming inability to let it go... I will simply leave the forum.
As master coach Jim Ruta says - go where you are celebrated, not just merely tolerated.
F*** you Tyler.
- 10,806
Facts, logic, reason, respect. Not too much to ask in a professional discussion.
Everything I posted about UL and WL was factually correct to my knowledge. You are welcome to share facts that dispute them.
I said "you do not fully understand UL" .... which you proceeded to say yourself in a subsequent post.
The only opinions I shared was my opinion about consumer mindset pertaining to CV WL... which I have 15 years of experience with. If your opinion is different, then share it.
While my comment about your retirement planning process might be considered "opinion"; the carriers, regulators, and litigators would disagree. And you are the one who took shots at me first saying you hope my E&O is paid up.... over me sharing factual info....
Everything I posted about UL and WL was factually correct to my knowledge. You are welcome to share facts that dispute them.
I said "you do not fully understand UL" .... which you proceeded to say yourself in a subsequent post.
The only opinions I shared was my opinion about consumer mindset pertaining to CV WL... which I have 15 years of experience with. If your opinion is different, then share it.
While my comment about your retirement planning process might be considered "opinion"; the carriers, regulators, and litigators would disagree. And you are the one who took shots at me first saying you hope my E&O is paid up.... over me sharing factual info....
- Thread starter
- #156
Well I was gone a couple days and WOW, like 10 new pages that went off the deep end 
David, don't leave... you are valuable to the forum. Tyler just got under your skin is all.
Fwiw, I agree with Tyler... his info about IUL is spot on. I used to think exactly like David did about IUL, until I really did some digging and learned that what I was being taught about it (mostly from WL promoters, some very well respected and successful) was not totally correct. We can spin anything, and the more successful they are the more weight that info carries. They are both great products, as long as they are designed for max funding AND (more importantly) funded correctly. I sell both.
Now, back to ON...
I only have a couple cases with them, thankfully. I guess I have to figure out how to run an in-force illustration and see what they look like. I haven't done anything with them in many years, so not sure how to do that.
What worries me the most about this whole situation, so many folks were sold these policies for supplemental retirement income (or worse, told to liquidate their retirement accounts and fund WL - so it IS their retirement income now) - and for many it won't happen. I can see potentially alot of lawsuits coming. Yes, the client signed up for it, and Yes, the company screwed them. But a jury won't care because the bad guy is always gonna be the one who made thousands or tens of thousands, (or in some cases) hundreds of thousands by putting this in place. I've never agreed with telling someone to liquidate their 401k and put it into insurance. That idea always through up a huge red flag for me.
Thinking as a lay person not an agent... if someone sold me on that idea, and it blew up... you can bet I'd be seeking retribution. I don't see how it can't happen. More importantly, how about the people that can't 1035? They are literally screwed... and imo, most certainly have a valid reason to sue. They have a pathetic performing WL policy that won't do near what they were told, and now have no actual investments to use for retirement. That's a tough situation for them, and honestly leaves a HUGE black eye on an industry that has often be thought of as slimy to begin with (by many).
I've sold max funded ins a good while, but I always believed it should be IN ADDITION TO investments, not INSTEAD OF investments. The spin that you could lose half your money in investments - while technically true because they are at risk in the market, is just a scare tactic. I see higher profile folks like Pamela Yellen and Rebecca Walser spouting that garbage non stop. What they don't talk about is when the market is up 30% in one year (or more) and it would take many many many yrs for a WL policy to make that kind of money.
I know, "its not about the amount you have, its the effectiveness of it (taxes)". While there is certainly some truth to the money being effective, a policy tax free payout will likely never come close to what investment accounts will do over the long haul. Yes, we don't know the future of the markets, but alas... if they bought an ON policy sold under this premise, they ain't got squat now either.
This whole thing is a bad deal for us all.
David, don't leave... you are valuable to the forum. Tyler just got under your skin is all.
Fwiw, I agree with Tyler... his info about IUL is spot on. I used to think exactly like David did about IUL, until I really did some digging and learned that what I was being taught about it (mostly from WL promoters, some very well respected and successful) was not totally correct. We can spin anything, and the more successful they are the more weight that info carries. They are both great products, as long as they are designed for max funding AND (more importantly) funded correctly. I sell both.
Now, back to ON...
I only have a couple cases with them, thankfully. I guess I have to figure out how to run an in-force illustration and see what they look like. I haven't done anything with them in many years, so not sure how to do that.
What worries me the most about this whole situation, so many folks were sold these policies for supplemental retirement income (or worse, told to liquidate their retirement accounts and fund WL - so it IS their retirement income now) - and for many it won't happen. I can see potentially alot of lawsuits coming. Yes, the client signed up for it, and Yes, the company screwed them. But a jury won't care because the bad guy is always gonna be the one who made thousands or tens of thousands, (or in some cases) hundreds of thousands by putting this in place. I've never agreed with telling someone to liquidate their 401k and put it into insurance. That idea always through up a huge red flag for me.
Thinking as a lay person not an agent... if someone sold me on that idea, and it blew up... you can bet I'd be seeking retribution. I don't see how it can't happen. More importantly, how about the people that can't 1035? They are literally screwed... and imo, most certainly have a valid reason to sue. They have a pathetic performing WL policy that won't do near what they were told, and now have no actual investments to use for retirement. That's a tough situation for them, and honestly leaves a HUGE black eye on an industry that has often be thought of as slimy to begin with (by many).
I've sold max funded ins a good while, but I always believed it should be IN ADDITION TO investments, not INSTEAD OF investments. The spin that you could lose half your money in investments - while technically true because they are at risk in the market, is just a scare tactic. I see higher profile folks like Pamela Yellen and Rebecca Walser spouting that garbage non stop. What they don't talk about is when the market is up 30% in one year (or more) and it would take many many many yrs for a WL policy to make that kind of money.
I know, "its not about the amount you have, its the effectiveness of it (taxes)". While there is certainly some truth to the money being effective, a policy tax free payout will likely never come close to what investment accounts will do over the long haul. Yes, we don't know the future of the markets, but alas... if they bought an ON policy sold under this premise, they ain't got squat now either.
This whole thing is a bad deal for us all.
- 10,806
I sell both, I own both. I sold just as much WL last year as I did IUL.
They both have their place and both have their uses.
Imo, sharing factually inaccurate info about either product does our industry zero good. Why someone would willingly want to do that is beyond me.
---
I used to shy away from secondary guarantee products, but over the past few years I have found them to be incredibly useful when doing protection based planning for clients. Especially some of the GIULs that are out now which carry a lower cost than normal UL.
I once thought all indexed products were a complete scam.... its what I was being told by people I considered "experts"... in reality they just wanted me to sell what they got paid to get me to sell.
Once you actually dive into the numbers on your own, and learn how to run the scenarios on your own, you realize why UL exists as a product. WL is so limited in how it can fit all the various situations and needs we encounter.
Lloyds of Lubbock
Guru
- 753
.
So you are going to do business with two more Mutual Holding companies, how surprised will you act when they screw their policyholders?
Plus what about NY Life?
Tough to do business wit and horrible software but I think their 10 pay is tough to beat and their limited pay LTD policies are quite impressive
NYL requires a minimum premium of 20k in the brokerage market. What do you mean by LTD?
Similar threads
