Buy Term, Whole Life is TOO Expensive.....or is It?

I've owned it a very long time and kicks very much ass....

I also have owned other investments a very long time as I am securities licensed.

What I can truly say about whole life is that it is the one product I worry about the least among the other investments I have. It does what it says it's going to do without a lot of bragging it up... How many "investments" can you say that about? How many 12% hypothetical returns do you have to show and then hope it comes close?

A whole life with a solid company is pretty straight forward. Any investment is a risk that you "hope" comes through for you.

The question for you MR. INVESTMENT ADVISOR is this? Do you put all your client's money at RISK? Is that good pratice?

Whole life statements are for when the market has done what it's done for the past 3-4 years. If you don't understand what that means, then you had no money invested prior to the Bush years.
 
WL makes sense when the client has a need for LI past age 75.
And if they have any decent amount of assets its very likely that they will.

Should all of their LI be WL?... no.
But it usually makes sense to have some of it in some type of Permanent Insurance.

That is one of the situations where I could see it making sense. Thanks for the input!
 
not sure if I would use the phrase "tap that" in a presentation... ; )

Interesting analogy.

Use WL or permanent when the risk you are protecting against will not go away or lessen over time. Estate taxes will most likely not go away. Insurance for a family with a mentally disabled child. Parents will always want money to be left for disabled child.

I have used it where client did not like the market and had no need for it, but wanted to leave it for the kids. He over funded a UL policy and now has a bigger benefit to leave the kids, but access to it if he needed it.
 
Last edited:
The question for you MR. INVESTMENT ADVISOR is this? Do you put all your client's money at RISK? Is that good pratice?

While I do have younger clients that work with me, 80% of my book is retirees or soon to be retirees. They have 401k's, pensions, some outside assets and are looking for a monthly paycheck each month.

Most is invested into mutual funds/ETF's, etc and will sometimes partner that with annuities with an income rider.

So no, I don't put all my clients money at risk UNLESS they just need growth to compensate for the fact they didn't save enough and still retired. Meaning that an annuity with a 5% income rider isn't even close to covering their monthly income need.
 
russelltw said:
not sure if I would use the phrase "tap that" in a presentation... ; )

Interesting analogy.

Depends on the client....Take my brother-in-law, perfect wording for him....I just can't see him sitting down to hear about life insurance......But I bet he would be interested if he overheard that description.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
thecorp said:
While I do have younger clients that work with me, 80% of my book is retirees or soon to be retirees. They have 401k's, pensions, some outside assets and are looking for a monthly paycheck each month.

Most is invested into mutual funds/ETF's, etc and will sometimes partner that with annuities with an income rider.

So no, I don't put all my clients money at risk UNLESS they just need growth to compensate for the fact they didn't save enough and still retired. Meaning that an annuity with a 5% income rider isn't even close to covering their monthly income need.

Notice you never mentioned a SPIA.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the client....Take my brother-in-law, perfect wording for him....I just can't see him sitting down to hear about life insurance......But I bet he would be interested if he overheard that description.

This forum would do well with a "Like" button like on Facebook. Would have given the big thumb on this one. :D
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Notice you never mentioned a SPIA.

Quoted a few for a few clients, but the income need didn't work. Not opposed to them though. Not at all.
 
Last edited:
On a side note, I have looked more into UL policies as a Roth replacement. Don't understand them enough to feel comfortable recommending them yet but considering doing one on myself just to test drive it.

I think this is a horrible idea. In very rare circumstances does this ever make sense.
 
Back
Top