- 11,280
From reading past posts it semms like people just like to puch mike goldens buttons. It actually quite amusing
- Thread starter
- #12
M
Mike_Golden1
Guest
I don't have a problem with disagreement, I have a huge problem with personal insults, particularly when the insulter talks out of both sides of his mouth. To complain about a plan to the point of suggesting my E&O carrier or upline would not be happy with me offering it to clients that currently lack coverage because it only has Generic drug coverage when Golden Rule, his favorite carrier (at least based on his past posts, which I no longer can read because he is on Ignore), has plans such as HSA Saver, Copay Saver, and Saver80, which offer absolutely NO Rx coverage, is completely disingenuous.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Thread starter
- #13
M
Mike_Golden1
Guest
I'm glad you find it amusing. I find people like you and those who choose to criticize others personally rather than offering sincere comments that might help others rather misanthropic.
Here's a link to help you understand that last word, you will probably need it:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/
Or maybe it's just petty jealousy because someone rather new to the industry is beginning to succeed where so many new agents fail...
Last edited by a moderator:
You misunderstand . . . quite often actually.
It was not a personal attack, just an observation about the GTL plan . . . no Rx coverage.
Barry (bkrocko) and I talked about the plan a few days ago. I have also been pitched on it by two others in the last few weeks. The plan does have merit but I have also priced it against other plans with $10k deductibles and found the price difference to be inconsequential.
For clients that are ready for a higher deductible plan I will often use World. They have a $10k, 100% plan that is comprehensive (includes Rx). I did price the GTL plan against World in 4 different situations. In every case World was higher by an average of 5%. Sure, there is full underwriting but so what? Underwriting followed by a phone interview helps the carrier & client avoid problems down the road on conditions that may not have been fully disclosed and can result in a claim denial or worse, rescission of the policy.
When you have been around the business as long as I have, and have handled as many claims as I have, you will learn there are enough holes in comprehensive major med plans without muddying the water with a limited benefit plan.
Yes, GR does offer plans without Rx and other outpatient services. Doesn't mean I offer them to my clients.
I don't. Never have. Never will.
The same (limited benefit plans) can be said for Time (Assurant does not issue the policy, they are merely the parent), World, KP, Blue (Tonik), Aetna and probably a few others.
That does not make the carrier bad, just the plans they offer.
And yes, you do have to sell a rider, just like you have to sell a rate bump.
My preference is to offer the most value to my clients. Sometimes that means a rider, sometimes a rate bump. Sometimes a combination of both but in EVERY case they are better off than they would be had they kept their current plan and the plan I put them with does NOT have artificial limits on Rx, outpatient, etc.
Replacing Mega, UA or other defined benefit plans is great, as long as you are not creating a bigger problem for your clients.
At the end of the day each of us must live with what we have done for our clients. I never recommend something I would not buy for myself or my family and I trust you feel the same.
You can ignore me if you wish. I do likewise for some of the folks in this forum who really have little or nothing to contribute and never want to take the advice of others (not just me) who have been around the block a few times.
There is something to be said for folks who have survived in this business. Guys such as Chumps, Sman, Newmindfashion (who rarely posts any more) and Moonlight (another this forum lost). Those 4 individuals have a combined 70+ years in the industry. Add in my 30+ and you have more experience than most of the rest of the folks combined.
But what do I know? I am just a guy who spends way too much time in this forum.
It was not a personal attack, just an observation about the GTL plan . . . no Rx coverage.
Barry (bkrocko) and I talked about the plan a few days ago. I have also been pitched on it by two others in the last few weeks. The plan does have merit but I have also priced it against other plans with $10k deductibles and found the price difference to be inconsequential.
For clients that are ready for a higher deductible plan I will often use World. They have a $10k, 100% plan that is comprehensive (includes Rx). I did price the GTL plan against World in 4 different situations. In every case World was higher by an average of 5%. Sure, there is full underwriting but so what? Underwriting followed by a phone interview helps the carrier & client avoid problems down the road on conditions that may not have been fully disclosed and can result in a claim denial or worse, rescission of the policy.
When you have been around the business as long as I have, and have handled as many claims as I have, you will learn there are enough holes in comprehensive major med plans without muddying the water with a limited benefit plan.
Yes, GR does offer plans without Rx and other outpatient services. Doesn't mean I offer them to my clients.
I don't. Never have. Never will.
The same (limited benefit plans) can be said for Time (Assurant does not issue the policy, they are merely the parent), World, KP, Blue (Tonik), Aetna and probably a few others.
That does not make the carrier bad, just the plans they offer.
And yes, you do have to sell a rider, just like you have to sell a rate bump.
My preference is to offer the most value to my clients. Sometimes that means a rider, sometimes a rate bump. Sometimes a combination of both but in EVERY case they are better off than they would be had they kept their current plan and the plan I put them with does NOT have artificial limits on Rx, outpatient, etc.
Replacing Mega, UA or other defined benefit plans is great, as long as you are not creating a bigger problem for your clients.
At the end of the day each of us must live with what we have done for our clients. I never recommend something I would not buy for myself or my family and I trust you feel the same.
You can ignore me if you wish. I do likewise for some of the folks in this forum who really have little or nothing to contribute and never want to take the advice of others (not just me) who have been around the block a few times.
There is something to be said for folks who have survived in this business. Guys such as Chumps, Sman, Newmindfashion (who rarely posts any more) and Moonlight (another this forum lost). Those 4 individuals have a combined 70+ years in the industry. Add in my 30+ and you have more experience than most of the rest of the folks combined.
But what do I know? I am just a guy who spends way too much time in this forum.
- 14,809
What do you do when GR removes drug coverage for people on meds?
Tell the client they will have to pay out of pocket for the meds.
Norvasc is a popular BP med. Costco sells 30 tabs for $68. Generic form is $45.
Husband & wife, 40, both with HBP and no other issues. BP controlled by diet & meds. Plan 100 with GR is $279; Time Max is $398 with 20% load and no Rx cover until they hit $500/year. In other words, no cover for their meds until the 8th month if they buy brand; none until the 12th month if they go generic.
Cost to them over 12 months (assuming generic) is $279 + $90 x 12 = $4428 with GR. With Time it is $398 + 90 x 12 = $5856.
Same deal, but with $5700 HSA.
GR is $254 vs. $327 with Time.
Over 12 months the GR is $254 + $90 x 12 = $4128; with Time it is $327 + $90 x 12 = $5004.
It doesn't always work out that way and I picked folks at random but more often than not, especially on low cost maintenance meds it makes more sense to self insure.
I wouldn't pay an extra $900 - $1400 per year to insure something that still wont be covered by the higher priced plan. Why should I ask my client to do so?
Sometimes it makes sense (depending on the condition and the cost of treatment) to self insure, sometimes not. Often I will suggest a plan with KP, Aetna, Time or World at a higher price because the condition and the cost differential is worthwhile.
- 14,809
Just a difference of opinion. I don't like riders. Interesting you mentioned Newmindfashion - Jesse since he has a whopping two GR cases in this year - also hates the riders and won't offer them.
And in your scenario, what if the medication changes? What if they get put on two meds? What if a $100 med changes to a $400 med? Then your client is screwed. I won't put them in that situation of potential liability. Again, just different methods - neither is right or wrong/ethical or unethical. Sometimes we have to agree to disagree.
And in your scenario, what if the medication changes? What if they get put on two meds? What if a $100 med changes to a $400 med? Then your client is screwed. I won't put them in that situation of potential liability. Again, just different methods - neither is right or wrong/ethical or unethical. Sometimes we have to agree to disagree.
We don't need to turn this board into a drama show!! If you don't like someone's opinion then maybe you should keep it to yourself instead of insulting them and calling names. That is uncalled for man!!
I have the same GTL product that I probably won't sell, but if someone is in that position it could be a great option since underwriting is extremely fair on this plan. I like the CI built in, even though I'd try to give them more CI coverage above that.
I have the same GTL product that I probably won't sell, but if someone is in that position it could be a great option since underwriting is extremely fair on this plan. I like the CI built in, even though I'd try to give them more CI coverage above that.
And Assurant doesn't?? Just about every carrier has some type of stripped out plan!
