The Industry is Changing Quickly

[NSRH]

A number of reasons:

1. Sometimes the grass isn't greener. I don't want to release someone if they won't be able to be released back to me.
   
2. Sometimes people will roll their book, at the behest of their uplines. This agreement will help prevent that.
   
3. Also makes future releases from that organization smoother. Once this is signed we have an agreement to release to one another.
4. Helps me know what organizations won't release. The only organizations that won't sign this are organizations that, by and large, won't release under any circumstance.

I would never sign this, and I release every single agent that asks for one without question.

Why would I sign anything with you if one of your agents wanted to leave your hierarchy. That decision has very little to do for me.

Im sorry if Im missing anything, but this doesn't look or feel like a true open release policy. It feels like a bunch of hoops an agent has to jump through to get a release.

I've seen it happen. An agent wants a release, I dont sign this paper, and agencies like you wont release them.

How is that fair to the agent?

 

[goillini52]

Like this

Why so complicated? I've had one that was just quickly typed out, not on letterhead. A couple of sentences. Another was a couple of paragraphs.

It doesn't need to be fancy....just release.

 

[HoosierLife]

I gave my reasons. It's also the same release that almost every IMO on this forum uses.

It's the one I've been signing my whole career.

 

[goillini52]

Integrity owns N&F... thats not possible.

 

[NSRH]

I gave my reasons. It's also the same release that almost every IMO on this forum uses.

It's the one I've been signing my whole career.

That's interesting, so I'm not missing anything I guess.

That's not a release... that's a conditional release.

A responsible IMO looking to hire one of your agents wouldn't sign that. So you don't release agents I guess, and according to you, most IMOs on this forum don't.

I'm a bit surprised to be honest.

For the IMOs that use this double talk release, why wouldn't you just release a good agent that wants to leave your hierarchy?

 

[HoosierLife]

That's interesting, so I'm not missing anything I guess.

That's not a release... that's a conditional release.

A responsible IMO looking to hire one of your agents wouldn't sign that. So you don't release agents I guess, and according to you, most IMOs on this forum don't.

I'm a bit surprised to be honest.

For the IMOs that use this double talk release, why wouldn't you just release a good agent that wants to leave your hierarchy?

I literally gave my reasons by bullet point when you asked me the first time.

 

[NSRH]

I literally gave my reasons by bullet point when you asked me the first time.

With all due respect, you're reasoning is very weak and one sided I'm inviting someone else to articulate better reasoning.

 

[HoosierLife]

With all due respect, you're reasoning is very weak and one sided I'm inviting someone else to articulate better reasoning.

I won't lie, I didn't like it back in the day. When I couldn't get anyone to sign this release for KsKJ when I was trying to move it from fex, I was pissed.

Argued the same way you're arguing now.

Now that I'm on the other side, I see it differently.

 

[Newby]

I can't see the release that Josh posted on my iPhone. But I assume it's just the standard one it's been around forever. It is a conditional release that's what I've always used. But if an IMO doesn't like it they can type up any release they want. The only condition that we want is that they will assume all debts from that agent from the date of the release forward.

I don't need them to agree to release agents to me. That doesn't make me any difference at all.

 

[rousemark]

Yes. I'm not sure why it would make any difference to Integrity if the agency they bought out was direct or not. I'm not understanding your line of thinking. They are buying the production.

If I have a 150% contract with Trans for instance. And say that's under YIG. And if Integrity bought me, would that be LESS desirable than if I had 150% contract direct to Trans? What is the advantage?

Integrity already has a direct Trans contract anyway because they bought Premier. So I would assume that when Integrity buys any agency that sells Trans it's going to move to their contract that they bought from Premier.

There were only four IMOs in the country with the top direct contract to Trans. And Premier and YIG were two of them. So now there are basically three IMO's with the top deal. No one else is direct unless they took a lower commission level.

If they bought you but not your upline and then If they moved you to Premier, then would that cut out your current upline? I think that is what Josh is talking about..