HometownQuotes Leads

[Crabcake Johnny]

Well, then we can get into a conversation about whether or not leads are "held" for short periods of time to give the lead vendor's "A list" buyers a chance to call first.

So while you think you're getting the lead in real time, amazingly every time you call the second it hits your in box the line is busy. And it's busy because it's been deliberately delayed.

Other issues are whether or not the lead is exclusive. Yes, Vendor A might have only sold the lead to you for a premium exclusive price. But did they get that lead from Vendor B who's already sold it to 4 agents?

The last issue are leads being "scored" and the "best" leads go off to the best clients and the "worst" leads - the ones that score poorly, go off to the masses.

 

[Evan]

I've had 9 people call me from a life quote, not 2.

I'd never suggest that anyone put in for a quote but if you did I can guarantee you wouldn't have "14 agents" calling. Nor, 12, or 8, or 4. More like 2.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

How many times did you test it - once or 5,000 times? You won't be able to gauge the true results until you test it many, many times.

And you don't want to put in a bunch of bogus lead requests. Reference Netquote vs Mostchoice.

 

[Evan]

John,

I submitted it once but that is all I needed to see that this company was selling their leads to both Netquote and 2insurance4Less.

Here's a sample of them emails I received:

Your Life Insurance Quotes from HometownQuotes

[email protected]" <[email protected]>


eric van haaften <[email protected]>

From James Muscarnera with Morgan Stanley

[email protected]"

Requested Life Insurance Quotes

"[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Life insurance quote you requested
From:
Bennett Leiser <[email protected]>

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

That's nice but there are other factors. One factor is whether or not an agency or general agent was one of the buyers, then passed that lead down to 6 of their agents.

When I was with a captive outfit that's exactly what they did. The manager would buy shared leads, they forward the same lead to 5 sub-agents.

 

[LGilmore]

health, While I agree with some of what you're saying, I think you're also dumping it all on the agent. Some leads do suck. Let me explain.

I have had a rash of leads come in that have correct names, correct address and correct phone number. Email is wonky, personal information is wonky. When contacted these people have no idea of what I am talking about as they never attempting anything online. These are leads that don't matter how good or bad my closing skills are as they are fake leads.

Someone has figured out that they can create a revenue stream from online lead companies by simply going through a phone directory and adding a fake email address and fake personal information and submitting them. It then falls upon the agent to do the footwork and "if" the named person calls back, request the credit. I more or less shut down another lead vendor because around 90% of what was coming in were these "manufactured leads", I was spending too much time verifying that these people hadn't submited anything. In fact, I know the percentage would be even higher if a couple more had returned calls. So while some are caught and credited, many more are not.

These are not someone putting a fake name in, these are not kids playing, this is organized and they have some tell tale clues when they come in that let you know it's manufactured. I'm not going to mention those because for all I know they read this stuff.

My point is that it isn't always the agent. Some leads do suck because they don't even give an agent a chance to be told "no" by someone who was interested.

I have to say I did receive credit for each and every one of those manufactured leads. The problem becomes one of spending too much time chasing fake leads which means you're spending time talking to a person who isn't really interested.

When found I am told these affiliates are deleted from the mix, yet what keeps them from throwing up a new name and Ip address and coming back?

There are always people who figure out how to scam something. There used to be a National Physical Theraphy company that added a "ice" charge of $7 on each treatment bill. While a percentage were caught and corrected ("sorry, we'll take that right off.") most weren't, so this company made millions billing for something never used and if caught gave a sorry and credit for what was found out.

There was a mom and pop grocery store who used to collect all the extra Sunday coupon ads from the paper. Then they would clip out coupons and submit to the manufacturer to collect checks. A sunday afternoon tearing coupons would net $1000 in reinbursement for a product they sold less than a case of.

There are people who figure out how to game the system. It is simply not fair to lump it all on agents and their ability or lack thereof.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

I totally 100% agree. And let me ask you something - if you were a lead vendor do you think a high volume of those kinds of leads would shut your business down? Absolutely.

The good vendors also after those kinds of affiliates. And yes, certain affiliates absolutely feed "data" through their quote sites to generate fake quotes.

The only thing you can do to separate the good vendors from the bad is when you alert them to the fact that you just got a batch of bogus leads, you get credited.

To me, a return cap has nothing to do with fake leads. There's a 100% return cap on fake leads or I'm gone.

The worst con out there is when all the data is fake except the email. Scamming affiliates have learned to "game" the vendor's return policies which have almost all been adjusted to not honor returns if the email doesn't bounce. Basically, they've learned they can still get paid if the number is fake, address is bogus and the customer in general is bogus - just make sure the email doesn't bounce.

 

[LGilmore]

"And let me ask you something - if you were a lead vendor do you think a high volume of those kinds of leads would shut your business down? Absolutely. "

I think the hard part for them is how do you keep them from coming back under another name and Ip address?
It's like stomping out a fire, and an ember slips out and starts another fire a little farther away.

You're absolutely right if not managed, it absolutely kills a lead company's business. While the carrier's credit policy was very fair, I couldn't continue with them with such a high level of fake leads.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

It's a battle where they'll always be a step behind. It's the same battle merchants fight when people buy something then charge the transaction back. It's the same thing Ebay battles with fake auctions.

I would imagine the only way a vendor could beat bad affiliates is to make sure they're always a month back on being paid.

Leads generated on June 1st aren't payable until July 1st - and of course the vendor needs to constantly sample leads.

Good vendors would be proactive on quality control while poor vendors would only be reactionary. What lead vendors fear the most, outside of flat out bogus leads, is low volume. If they cannot satisfy the volume needs of their agents, they know for a fact they'll go elsewhere.

 

[LGilmore]

"generated on June 1st aren't payable until July 1st "

You mean, pay em like agents?

cept the July 1st becomes August 1st....