The plan you have is the IC Blue, which was replaced with the IC Blue II. Stick with it. 0 deductible, with low OOP coinsurance max. There's no product you will be approved for that is comparable to it by even a mile.
------------------------------------
"Sometimes when you bring the thunder, you get lost in the storm"- Kenny Powers
go to a high ded plan, protect your self for the big stuff, the rates in Michigan went up because they take everyone, no matter how sick, BCBS of MI lost 112 million last year on their ID biz, State law says a Non-profit can't do that, call action Benefits they will help you change your plan
Huh? Is individual insurance GI in Michigan? Wow, wish it was here.
Also, those big increases have been a blessing in disguise for agents. Lot's of people are looking to switch plans and are actively contacting agents for help.
Yes they are GI in Michigan... BCBS will take anyone in MI no matter what you may have to wait 6 month to have some things covered but it will happen, heck until june of this year, there were dialiys (sp) centers that were tranfering their people over to BCBS because it payed better.. thats why you got a 32%increase and good luck moving somone off of BCBS,
MI is not a GI state, but BX is a carrier of last resort.
Didn't realize there were such big differences between states. In CA Blue Cross is probably the 1st choice for most agents. They have the most products and currently have real competitive prices.
Buxfan, see if you can follow. I may repeat for clarity.
Carriers give increases because they can. In spite of what POTUS and Princess Pelosi say about a lack of competition in the market place, carriers can not simply raise premiums with impunity. If the increase results in the premium being out of line with the market, they lose market share.
If not, they were pretty smart.
A few years ago BCBSGA was 20% or more below the market and making offers on 96% (their figures) of apps. Like other agents, I took advantage of the crack in the market and wrote business.
First renewals were in the 45% range but guess what? Almost everyone was STILL competitive in the market.
This idea of a free market equilibrium may be foreign to you, but that's OK. I'm sure that liberal arts degree is worth something.
Buxfan, see if you can follow. I may repeat for clarity.
Carriers give increases because they can. In spite of what POTUS and Princess Pelosi say about a lack of competition in the market place, carriers can not simply raise premiums with impunity. If the increase results in the premium being out of line with the market, they lose market share.
If not, they were pretty smart.
A few years ago BCBSGA was 20% or more below the market and making offers on 96% (their figures) of apps. Like other agents, I took advantage of the crack in the market and wrote business.
First renewals were in the 45% range but guess what? Almost everyone was STILL competitive in the market.
This idea of a free market equilibrium may be foreign to you, but that's OK. I'm sure that liberal arts degree is worth something.
HAHA... As an actuary at a health insurance company, I know more about what you are talking about then you do sir. Believe me, it took a lot more than a liberal arts degree to get my job.
Carriers give increases not because they can, but because they have to if they want to remain in business. It's that simple.
HAHA... As an actuary at a health insurance company, I know more about what you are talking about then you do sir. Believe me, it took a lot more than a liberal arts degree to get my job.
Carriers give increases not because they can, but because they have to if they want to remain in business. It's that simple.
What’s this?
A bean counter. Nice, we can learn from you.
Maybe not your department, buta what percentage of new business is coming from agents vs. online "directly?".
Or have you heard anything in that regard. I have my own sources but …
Don't suppose we can ask what state you are out of?
What’s this?
A bean counter. Nice, we can learn from you.
Maybe not your department, buta what percentage of new business is coming from agents vs. online "directly?".
Or have you heard anything in that regard. I have my own sources but …
The company I work for is distributed stricly through agents. Nothing through the direct market, so I can't really answer your question. The company I was at previously was starting to have a little success with the direct market right before I left.
Originally Posted by ins.dave
Don't suppose we can ask what state you are out of?
My company operates in many states. That's really all I care to say about that.
Carriers give rate increases because they can. Sure, they are dictated by loss ratio's as well as what the DOI allows, but they are mostly driven my market forces.
BX used to give 40 - 50% increases at the first renewal and they actually got away with it. Now it is more like 30% and sometimes they will still get a pass.
A few years ago they were writing at 20 - 30% below market and issuing policies on anyone who could fog a mirror. First renewal and bam! 40% or more.
They got away with it partly because of who they were and partly because even with the rate bump they were still competitive. It usually took 3 yrs for the rate party to wear off.
By then the folks were sicker and couldn't go anywhere. The healthy ones that were stupid kept paying the increase because when they shopped it before the rate was still competitive. The wise ones moved on and they ended up with a bunch of dogs and a few healthy (but stupid) folks.
So they did in fact give rate increases because they could get away with it.
Actuaries think they know it all but they have no clue how the market works. Actuaries may set the rates but usually marketing decides what to implement.
Actuaries are simply underwriters, but without the personality.
Unless the carrier is totally committed to direct sales, such as Geico, most will flounder. The business they do write, at least on the health side, has a higher not taken rate and usually lapses in less than 6 months. In short, it isn't profitable.
That's because carriers have no clue how to market health insurance direct to the public and never will.
The company I work for is distributed stricly through agents. Nothing through the direct market, so I can't really answer your question. The company I was at previously was starting to have a little success with the direct market right before I left.
My company operates in many states. That's really all I care to say about that.
Huh?,
You guys smell something?
You tell’n me you worked for a national insurance company as an actuary that did not have a website that people could apply through “directly?”
Please explain AIM type product, most month's I can pay the $600 but there are month's I can't.
I go 60 days without paying and I will have nothing, there are no jobs here with good pay and benefits that meet my education and skills level. I cannot move until my mid 80 year old parents are no longer here. I take care of them on weekends.
Not whining here, just looking at options that may be out there. There is no way I will ever be happy about paying $600 a month for something I rarely use but need.
-------------
Tell the truth?
As an American, you would hate it if the number was even $300 per month for something that you "rarely use but need?"
Personally, I think all agents hate it when people say that. Nobody wants to "use" their life insurance do they?
It is security. Funny how I've never one time heard an insured express concern over how much their insurance company had to pay out on a claim. Strange huh?
People can't get their minds around anything that is not immediately tangible it seems.
You pay out $7200 per year to have much better quality of care than the Canadian who pays 20+ dollars for a 12 of domestic beer, $12+ dollars for a pack of cigaretts and a $5000 surcharge with the sale and or resale of every care they buy or sell, etc.
Maybe start thinking in those terms for a change?
Just a thought.
Last edited by ins.dave : 09-13-2009 at 01:54 PM.
Reason: Posts merged
"Tell the truth?
As an American, you would hate it if the number was even $300 per month for something that you "rarely use but need?"
Personally, I think all agents hate it when people say that. Nobody wants to "use" their life insurance do they?
It is security. Funny how I've never one time heard an insured express concern over how much their insurance company had to pay out on a claim. Strange huh?
People can't get their minds around anything that is not immediately tangible it seems.
You pay out $7200 per year to have much better quality of care than the Canadian who pays 20+ dollars for a 12 of domestic beer, $12+ dollars for a pack of cigaretts and a $5000 surcharge with the sale and or resale of every care they buy or sell, etc.
Maybe start thinking in those terms for a change?
Just a thought."
I would gladly pay $300 a month and it has nothing to do with "truth" or being an American. What I have a problem with is having to pay for those that abuse the system...smoke, live stupid lifestyles and go to the ER for a hangnail so they don't have to pay for a Dr's visit.
Not interested in the Canadian system...it sucks.
Charge the abusers accordingly and reward those that don't suck the system.
But I guess that would be to simple a concept. Eh?
Carriers give rate increases because they can. Sure, they are dictated by loss ratio's as well as what the DOI allows, but they are mostly driven my market forces.
BX used to give 40 - 50% increases at the first renewal and they actually got away with it. Now it is more like 30% and sometimes they will still get a pass.
A few years ago they were writing at 20 - 30% below market and issuing policies on anyone who could fog a mirror. First renewal and bam! 40% or more.
They got away with it partly because of who they were and partly because even with the rate bump they were still competitive. It usually took 3 yrs for the rate party to wear off.
By then the folks were sicker and couldn't go anywhere. The healthy ones that were stupid kept paying the increase because when they shopped it before the rate was still competitive. The wise ones moved on and they ended up with a bunch of dogs and a few healthy (but stupid) folks.
So they did in fact give rate increases because they could get away with it.
Actuaries think they know it all but they have no clue how the market works. Actuaries may set the rates but usually marketing decides what to implement.
Actuaries are simply underwriters, but without the personality.
Unless the carrier is totally committed to direct sales, such as Geico, most will flounder. The business they do write, at least on the health side, has a higher not taken rate and usually lapses in less than 6 months. In short, it isn't profitable.
That's because carriers have no clue how to market health insurance direct to the public and never will.
--------------------
Peach pit, would you not agree part of their problem in this regard is the fact that they can only show their own products?
Actuaries may set the rates but usually marketing decides what to implement.
If that were the case, we'd see a lot more 0% increases.
Originally Posted by somarco
Actuaries are simply underwriters, but without the personality.
Ouch!
Originally Posted by somarco
Unless the carrier is totally committed to direct sales, such as Geico, most will flounder. The business they do write, at least on the health side, has a higher not taken rate and usually lapses in less than 6 months. In short, it isn't profitable.
Originally Posted by somarco
That's because carriers have no clue how to market health insurance direct to the public and never will.
At least we agree on something.
Originally Posted by ins.dave
You tell’n me you worked for a national insurance company as an actuary that did not have a website that people could apply through “directly?”
Yes. It was exactly for the reason somarco mentioned above.
"Tell the truth?
As an American, you would hate it if the number was even $300 per month for something that you "rarely use but need?"
Personally, I think all agents hate it when people say that. Nobody wants to "use" their life insurance do they?
It is security. Funny how I've never one time heard an insured express concern over how much their insurance company had to pay out on a claim. Strange huh?
People can't get their minds around anything that is not immediately tangible it seems.
You pay out $7200 per year to have much better quality of care than the Canadian who pays 20+ dollars for a 12 of domestic beer, $12+ dollars for a pack of cigaretts and a $5000 surcharge with the sale and or resale of every care they buy or sell, etc.
Maybe start thinking in those terms for a change?
Just a thought."
I would gladly pay $300 a month and it has nothing to do with "truth" or being an American. What I have a problem with is having to pay for those that abuse the system...smoke, live stupid lifestyles and go to the ER for a hangnail so they don't have to pay for a Dr's visit.
Not interested in the Canadian system...it sucks.
Charge the abusers accordingly and reward those that don't suck the system.
But I guess that would be to simple a concept. Eh?
-------------
What say we stop B.S.ing each other and …
Seal the borders for real.
Big make work project. 20 ‘ chain link fence running from sea to shining see. Gun turret every so many yards.
Could have already been done a dozen times over for what has been spent in Iraq. F those black eyed b*stards anyway.
We need to get onto Natural gas and work toward renewables.
Illegals already here receive work permits. The Mexicans do work and make money, illegally at present. There not leaving so let’s get them contributing.
Mandatory coverage for all above the Medicaid economic level.
Fines for those that don’t comply to help pay for Medicaid.
Tort reform. Caps, yes, caps.
As they do in Canada and with Medicaid, have a group to prevent ins. fraud on the underwritten plans. No more over billing just because you think you can. Granted, the metrics involved could be contentious but …
Each one of these issues constitutes a “hole in the bucket.”
If you fix one but not the others, then the “water” just finds another hole to flow out of.
To get the costs down, this has got to be done comprehensively.
Bux, you will find I know a lot more about this business than you give me credit for, and I have probably worked with more actuaries than you have.
While the HO marketing guys are mostly dunces, they at least realize they have to balance loss ratio's against putting themselves out of a job. They take what actuarial tells them then crunch the numbers in their favor. Sometimes they can actually keep their job another year or so in doing that.
I can probably count on one hand the number of marketing VP's I have met and worked with over the years that really understood the big picture. Most of them lasted 5 years at best before finding another sucker carrier to hire them.
The health business isn't that difficult if you know how to manage it. A guy I met probably 25 years ago did a fantastic job of managing a national MEWA, something almost impossible to do. But he was given free reign and everyone made money.
Then upper management decided to take away some of his power, he left and the program collapsed within 2 years.
And before you ask, he actually had personality and marketing savvy . . . but his sock's never matched.
Most of the actuaries were absent minded professor types that could be fun at times but had no clue how the product worked in the market place. Another was negative on every suggestion that came from the field.
We called him Dr. No . . .
If carriers did a better job of delivering products that would actually sell, monitoring growth and trending loss ratio's we would all be better off. Some of them take data from Milliman and apply it to the letter while others use what they like and throw away the rest.
The latest trend in the health business, at least among the bigger carriers is to put a crap product online with low rates to appeal to the eHealth crowd. That kind of product will get them a lot of bad press down the road when they start denying Rx claims for some of the cancer drugs.
Of course they are within their right to do so since brand Rx isn't covered, but still it is stupid to even put that kind of product out there without a blatant warning label.
The other thing is to quote plans with very low rates and then hammer them on the back end in underwriting. That's a good way to waste time and money only to have the policy not taken or cancelled in a few months.
Re: 32 % Increase!
Linear Mode
