Universal Life Replacment Tips

[VolAgent]

To make a fair comparison I wonder what an illustration would have looked like on the W/S UL if she had increased her prem the additional $ 34 mo...? I realize that you aren't going to find that out, but it is a valid questiion for an apples to apples comparison. I guess we will never know... unless the W/S agent came back into the picture.

Do you have any illustration software that has NLGs in it? They are ugly if you put more than the required premium in there. Every one I have ever seen ate the cash value. There really wasn't any point to it. LFG use to have one that they pimped having an NLG and cash accumulation. Even it was horrible, it just wasn't as bad as the others out there.

 

[SportsNut]

Do you have any illustration software that has NLGs in it?.

No, sure don't. I would get the illustration from the issuing company if I really wanted to know. My only point is, not all things/ideas being sold in this thread are absolute... i.e. Take a GUL issued at std rating compared to a Tbl 4-8 FE policy... I don't think that the WL-FE policy is going to out perform a UL at std issue rates, if in fact that is what is in hand. Of course we don't know, but we don't know the other assertions to be factual either. I'm just sayin.

 

[VolAgent]

No, sure don't. I would get the illustration from the issuing company if I really wanted to know. My only point is, not all things/ideas being sold in this thread are absolute... i.e. Take a GUL issued at std rating compared to a Tbl 4-8 FE policy... I don't think that the WL-FE policy is going to out perform a UL at std issue rates, if in fact that is what is in hand. Of course we don't know, but we don't know the other assertions to be factual either. I'm just sayin.

A Table 4-8 FE policy isn't kind to the cash value either. But it is still nicer to it than a GUL. The GUL doesn't have to have cash value, as long as the shadow account stays positive it is fine. For the FE policy, it does have to endow at age 121.

 

[TPAAgent]

No, sure don't. I would get the illustration from the issuing company if I really wanted to know. My only point is, not all things/ideas being sold in this thread are absolute... i.e. Take a GUL issued at std rating compared to a Tbl 4-8 FE policy... I don't think that the WL-FE policy is going to out perform a UL at std issue rates, if in fact that is what is in hand. Of course we don't know, but we don't know the other assertions to be factual either. I'm just sayin.

You're stuck on "price" and not value--

There's no living benefits to a GUL, no paid up reduced option, you can't decrease your face amount or switch to a competitors lower premium product without losing your entire investment.

My client pays $30 more a month for a $50k WL vs a $50k GUL

She's now building cash value, has more options than before, she wont lose 100% of her investment if she cancels or stops paying..... She now is no longer tossing her money down the toilet

 

[Jack B]

You're stuck on "price" and not value--

There's no living benefits to a GUL, no paid up reduced option, you can't decrease your face amount or switch to a competitors lower premium product without losing your entire investment.

My client pays $30 more a month for a $50k WL vs a $50k GUL

She's now building cash value, has more options than before, she wont lose 100% of her investment if she cancels or stops paying..... She now is no longer tossing her money down the toilet

Everything has a price, the options your client has with the WL has a price, maybe $30 is worth it, maybe not, If client is in good health & would get a preffered eating for GUL, the price for the WL FE VS GUL gets even higher.

 

[SportsNut]

You're stuck on "price" and not value--

There's no living benefits to a GUL, no paid up reduced option, you can't decrease your face amount or switch to a competitors lower premium product without losing your entire investment.

My client pays $30 more a month for a $50k WL vs a $50k GUL

She's now building cash value, has more options than before, she wont lose 100% of her investment if she cancels or stops paying..... She now is no longer tossing her money down the toilet

Your assertions would have more credence if we were say comparing a 500K GUL to a 500K WL as pref rates. I think that your points made above, while maybe sounding convincing to the client at the moment, lose lots of steam when we are comparing it to a FE policy.

What C/V is she going to have in these two policies... say in 3 yrs, 5yrs, 10 yrs...? How much switching is she going to do to another lower priced policy...? 'without losing Her entire investment'... We are talking FE ins here, not an investment.

We merely do not have enough facts to know IF the other UL policy would have performed equally as well or better than the TWO FE policies.

FACTS = something that is indisputably the case. Not opinion; (not yours and not mine)

 

[WinoBlues]

You're stuck on "price" and not value--

There's no living benefits to a GUL, no paid up reduced option, you can't decrease your face amount or switch to a competitors lower premium product without losing your entire investment.

My client pays $30 more a month for a $50k WL vs a $50k GUL

She's now building cash value, has more options than before, she wont lose 100% of her investment if she cancels or stops paying..... She now is no longer tossing her money down the toilet

I have no dog in this, unless of course this one of my homes, Then it is on like Donkey Kong. ;-)

However, you are wrong on some of the above. It may or may not be the with this particular client but in general. If you are interested send me your email and I can send you a real case study.

 

[TPAAgent]

What C/V is she going to have in these two policies... say in 3 yrs, 5yrs, 10 yrs...?

In the GUL, nothing
In her WL about $9,000 after 10 years

How much switching is she going to do to another lower priced policy...? 'without losing Her entire investment'...

That would be impossible to know, but it's still an option she'll be able to excerise in a WL policy

We are talking FE ins here, not an investment

.

You don't understand the definition of investment

We merely do not have enough facts to know IF the other UL policy would have performed equally as well or better than the TWO FE policies.

There's plenty of facts.. For one- they both will pay the exact same benefits when the client dies if the policy is still enforce- That is the only thing the two have in common.

 

[NCnatwidagent]

I've run across UL horror stories ever since getting into the insurance industry.
I just had a policy come across my desk that another so called "agent" had been handing. Policy was issued in 1987 and now its lapsing. I ran re-proposals and seems the poor sap now has to pay a $7000 lump sum and then $21,450 annually for the next 8yrs to keep it. Its only a $150,000 face amount.......so, I'm looking into other options. Bad thing is the client is now 77yrs old.
Any agent out there needs to really keep an eye on what they write!!

 

[SportsNut]

In the GUL, nothing
In her WL about $9,000 after 10 years

See, the point is you don't KNOW that the c/v would be 0 in the UL policy, you are making an assumption here to bolster your point. Maybe your ASSumption would be correct but my guess is that if you were dumping another 34 monthly into that policy that you would be incorrect. That is the difference here.

You don't understand the definition of investment

Duh... hard to argue with someone who is going to classify a FE policy as an investment. It clearly is not; or if it is, then that would then make you an "INVESTMENT COUNSELOR" LMAO.

I also sell FE products but they are surely not an INVESTMENT. Protection, surely... if they are in-force at the time of death but not an investment, no more than that UL policy was an INVESTMENT. I may look at things differently than you, but it doesn't make your view right, especially when you espouse things like a FE ins policy being an INVESTMENT. I do think I know what classifies as an investment; I've been in the biz for over 30 yrs, Series 7 licensed and CFP... but maybe I missed FE being an INVESTMENT in my travels.