Bob Klee- Hometown Quotes Offer

[axel foley]

110% agree with Dan.

Only refunds for disconnect's or wrong #'s would destroy lead companies and the agent's who purchase the leads.

I get so many leads with correct info that did not fill out the info for a quote it's insane and it's growing at a rapid pace.

For example:

1. Aged lead info resubmitted 6-12 months later as if it were a fresh shared lead.

2. Incentivized leads (free gift cards, facebook points etc...)

3. Life or Health lead resubmitted as an auto lead

4. Just bought a vehicle or looked for credit and info was sold

Unfortunately, there is a multitude of bogus info going through right now.

Believe me I know...I purchase a good amount of shared auto leads from 3 different carriers and have watched my conversion ratio plummet over the years.

BTW First post!

 

[axel foley]

110% agree with Dan. There seems to be a multitude of ever increasing ways to provide correct contact information for a bogus lead. Unfortunately, this is an ever increasing problem that I hope gets rectified soon.

I work with three different lead carriers for auto insurance and they are all experiencing this...I could go on at length regarding the topic.

 

[djs]

I should have added, that in my experience, lead vendors who have a bit more liberal return policy tend to have leads that are more contactable. Vendors who limit their returns tend to push out more of what I would consider junk.

I wonder why that is....

Dan

 

[axel foley]

1. Recycled Info (Aged Leads resubmitted as fresh leads)
2. Incentivized Leads (Free gifts, online game points etc...)
3. Life Leads resubmitted as auto leads

These are all instances with correct contact info and are obviously bogus leads.

In every cirumnstance the motivation for an auto insurance quote is not there.

Isn't that what I'm buying?

 

[axel foley]

"The trick to building a strong agency, is to work with your vendor to create an equally profitable campaign for both... stay in touch with your vendor, constantly give them feedback so they can monitor their ads online for quality, return obviously bad leads, but don't over do it, leave margin for the vendor as well as of course watch your bottom line. The one thing I can tell you from the lead side of the fence is this.....the harder you make it on the lead company, the worse the leads are going to get. Not by intention, but by simply economics...if you return too many we cant afford search traffic. Find the happy medium with your vendor, keep it transparent going both ways."

Are you implying that we should do the lead vendors job for them? Isn't that what we sign up for? To get good leads?

 

[Josh]

Are you implying that we should do the lead vendors job for them? Isn't that what we sign up for? To get good leads?

Not to get too philosophical, but if finding people to talk to his half (or more) of the job of selling insurance, aren't the lead vendors doing half the agents job for them?

 

[djs]

Not to get too philosophical, but if finding people to talk to his half (or more) of the job of selling insurance, aren't the lead vendors doing half the agents job for them?

No, but nice try.
If they are sending screended prospects with basic underwriting done, then yes. Simply being a conduit for someone to put misc information on a web page and then selling it multiple times doesn't make for half the work.

But yet, they take over half the money, go figure....

My statement is figured as follows:
Auto lead, avg sale: 1000 premium, $100 commission.
Lead Sold for $10, sold a minimum of 6 times, they take 60% of the new business commission, whether or not the client keeps the policy.

Following your model, they are probably doing MAYBE 25% of the work, so they should be capped at aroud $25 per lead, or $4 per agent sold.

Go figure, lead vendors won't do that......

Dan

 

[Josh]

For the record, I never said the junk internet leads are half the work the way you implied I did. I'm not defending those at all.

It was more of a philosophical point, but to delve in deeper:
-I think a P&C doesn't have the commission margin to justify spending much for leads.
-I don't think leads should be sold to more than one agent
-I respect the hell out of what you do by cold calling because I think that is the most practical way for a personal lines agent to get leads.
-If an agent doesn't want to do their own prospecting, they are at the mercy of what the market will bear for the services, and unfortunately, agents keep rewarding bad internet lead companies with money.

Also, you're completely ignoring the trail commissions. It's not $100, it's $100/year in your example (or to that effect). Med supp agents try the same trick, but even more so those clients will stick around. They cry "It's only a $200-$250 commission" but over 4 years that's $800-$1,000, not just the first year. "Nice try" as you put it.

 

[djs]

I also ignored the fact that not every lead is a sellable lead, even if you can contact them.

If you figure an auto policy is good for 3 years (average I think is 18 months), but only 1 in 3 leads is really a sellable lead, then the numbers work out the same.

There are cross-sell opportunities, multi-car, multi-policy, etc, but that isn't what the lead is, usually.

From a cash flow perspective, its hard to think about a policy as a multi-year thing. Unlike most here, I'm willing to spend up to almost the first years commission in getting a policy. I somewhat use this as a cut-off if a marketing plan works for me or not. You are right, internet leads are tough, if you don't work them hard, and I mean hard.

Best leads, by far, are referrals. I wish I could find a lead provider that worked 50% as well as referrals, but that doesn't really happen.

Dan

 

[Josh]

Unlike most here, I'm willing to spend up to almost the first years commission in getting a policy.

Which I think is genius! If I was doing P&C, that's the way I'd be doing it.