Went to the SL meeting

[rousemark]

Maybe if more agents sent all their risks to one company, there wouldn't be so many companies exiting the arena. At this rate, the captive outfits might be the only ones left.

You have a point.. If a company happens to have a "sweet spot" for COPD and the agents only send them COPD clients and sent their healthy clients elsewhere, it is doubtful the actuary took that into consideration when developing the rates. Result? Excessive loss ratios that result in a huge price increase, which aggravates the situation or they exit the market..

 

[TripleH]

The one, and maybe most important thing....You're not captive and you have several companies for your agents to use. This is the biggest part that Greg just doesn't understand. If he did, then he might begin to understand the rest of the things we try to explain to him. Nonetheless, he chooses to work with this one company and screw over many clients because of it. His choice, but not much of a choice when you do it out of ignorance though. Another sad thing is that he also spews his ignorance to other agents that he tries to recruit.

I think after reading your posts, I have seen the light and no matter how logical your argument is, he will not see the light. In the end of the day, he is not doing what is in the best interest of the agents or the clients. This is why 50-60% of my business comes from replacements and a fair amount is from Senior Life when I run into them. I won with my argument, but unfortunately its an endless battle of lengthy paragraphs...

 

[TripleH]

If he provides the benefits that clients need at a price point they can pay, even though it might not be the lowest price how can you say he is "screwing" the client.. If that be the case, every agent that has ever worked with a captive company is guilty. Also every Indy agent that is not contracted with every single FE company in order to always provide the lowest price is guilty..

I don't think its necessarily price that is always being sold on. It is the fact that the clients will be put into a graded or guaranteed issue plan where they are in a two-year wait although they have the ability to qualify for level coverage. I think someone else said it on the thread, they just run the eApp and give the client whatever it comes back as because they are fitting a square peg into a round hole. That's not doing what is in the best interest of the client, but you cannot blame an agent who is not aware of this, only those who are educated but still place the client in a product although there are better ones. That's probably the whole argument of being indy vs captive. If its GI and level is $10 more a month, I am giving them level coverage for the higher price...

 

[theinsuranceman]

If he provides the benefits that clients need at a price point they can pay, even though it might not be the lowest price how can you say he is "screwing" the client.. If that be the case, every agent that has ever worked with a captive company is guilty. Also every Indy agent that is not contracted with every single FE company in order to always provide the lowest price is guilty..

Rouse you are exactly correct.

 

[theinsuranceman]

Thanks for answering my questions. In the middle of the back and forth trash talk and shameless plugs I appreciate you for being a straight shooter.

You're quite welcome.

 

[theinsuranceman]

The one, and maybe most important thing....You're not captive and you have several companies for your agents to use. This is the biggest part that Greg just doesn't understand. If he did, then he might begin to understand the rest of the things we try to explain to him. Nonetheless, he chooses to work with this one company and screw over many clients because of it. His choice, but not much of a choice when you do it out of ignorance though. Another sad thing is that he also spews his ignorance to other agents that he tries to recruit.

 

[theinsuranceman]

Todd, why are you always so negative? Losers do that. I remember when you said screw the insurance companies a few months ago, remember that?

 

[rousemark]

I don't think its necessarily price that is always being sold on. It is the fact that the clients will be put into a graded or guaranteed issue plan where they are in a two-year wait although they have the ability to qualify for level coverage. I think someone else said it on the thread, they just run the eApp and give the client whatever it comes back as because they are fitting a square peg into a round hole. That's not doing what is in the best interest of the client, but you cannot blame an agent who is not aware of this, only those who are educated but still place the client in a product although there are better ones. That's probably the whole argument of being indy vs captive. If its GI and level is $10 more a month, I am giving them level coverage for the higher price...

The "bait and switch" you describe is dishonest and unethical and should not be done. But do you always offer them the lowest possible price for the best plan level they qualify for. For example if you have some who would qualify for level with 4 different companies do you always give them the best price? What if you know there is a company with which you aren't contracted that has a better price, what do you do? Write them you the best you have?

Or, to take it a step further. What if with all your companies the best you can do is modified but there is a company out there that you do not have would offer them level.. Then, what?

 

[theinsuranceman]

The one, and maybe most important thing....You're not captive and you have several companies for your agents to use. This is the biggest part that Greg just doesn't understand. If he did, then he might begin to understand the rest of the things we try to explain to him. Nonetheless, he chooses to work with this one company and screw over many clients because of it. His choice, but not much of a choice when you do it out of ignorance though. Another sad thing is that he also spews his ignorance to other agents that he tries to recruit.

Todd I'm just not smart enough to deal with 10 different carriers. I talk to recruits all the time who get dizzy trying to decide on which carrier to use.

I realize that you only have high contracts and a little experience for your agents and nothing else. You don't even have a lead program for your agents, they have to do their own drops with a 3rd party vendor.

You sound rather intimidated and kinda scared that you will lose agents to me....simply because I offer them way way way more than you....and I can give YOUR agents higher commission than you! Think about that!

If you don't use Kskj as a price buster for your prospects then you are screwing them. You are like a lot of brokers....you don't use kskj (even though they have the cheaper premium) because you take a haircut on commissions if you use them.

Todd get off your high horse and contribute something positive to the group. You'll look better.

 

[theinsuranceman]

Maybe if more agents sent all their risks to one company, there wouldn't be so many companies exiting the arena. At this rate, the captive outfits might be the only ones left.

You're probably correct. We see how the FE landscape has started changing the last few years. Brokers are kinda like termites when sending their bad business only to certain carriers. The financial infrastructure of these carriers starts to crumble and then it's another one bites the dust. There's more rumblings going on that most don't know about. Wait till after the summer and next year.

I'll bet you a coca-cola that in 3 years most FE carriers will not accept agents who are appointed with multiple carriers. They'll see their profitability improve which is sorely needed.