Direct to Carrier Vs IMO/FMO/MGA

[OklaMan]

I have the opportunity to appoint directly to Assurant Health, or appoint through an IMO/FMO/MGA. I can get higher commissions and renewal commissions on Major Medical through the IMO/FMO/MGA rather than going direct, and significantly higher commissions on supplemental products such as Cancer-Heart-Stroke, Accident, and Dental (by as much as approx 33% more) by going through that same IMO/FMO/MGA, rather than direct to Assurant. The IMO/FMO/MGA that I'm considering is a solid organization, and I have been appointed through them for over 5 years for Golden Rule, with no issues.

My question is: What are the advantages/disadvantages over the long haul of not going direct?

And is the difference in commissions worth not going direct?

I appreciate any & all input.

 

[goillini52]

I have the opportunity to appoint directly to Assurant Health, or appoint through an IMO/FMO/MGA. I can get higher commissions and renewal commissions on Major Medical through the IMO/FMO/MGA rather than going direct, and significantly higher commissions on supplemental products such as Cancer-Heart-Stroke, Accident, and Dental (by as much as approx 33% more) by going through that same IMO/FMO/MGA, rather than direct to Assurant. The IMO/FMO/MGA that I'm considering is a solid organization, and I have been appointed through them for over 5 years for Golden Rule, with no issues.

My question is: What are the advantages/disadvantages over the long haul of not going direct?

And is the difference in commissions worth not going direct?

I appreciate any & all input.

I don't know why you're asking the question...you already know the answer.

 

[Yagents]

Only do it if u want to pay more taxes

 

[OklaMan]

I'm asking because the regional Assurant rep is planting heavy seeds of doubt, and I'm just thinking that if I go direct I would be sacrificing commission, but I wouldn't have someone in control of releasing me if I wanted to do so, later on.

 

[Josh]

So contract 1: 8% direct with carrier, but can get release.
Contract 2: 12% through IMO, but concerned about release.

Hmmm, still seems pretty easy to me.

 

[FLM2]

Some of you are in for a rude awakening very shortly-I had a call this morning from Assurant National Sales Office letting me know that their 12 month advance program is dead and gone after January 1st.

As one of their top producers last year (that's what my rep told me) they are offering a limited number of agents a token 3 month advance to replace it. I no longer need these so am just going As Earned for all my business.

If there are IMOs offering advances it will be on their own nickel so you will have to assign commissions and then worry about getting paid-given the risk of chargeback to the IMOs I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole.

 

[OklaMan]

Some of you are in for a rude awakening very shortly-I had a call this morning from Assurant National Sales Office letting me know that their 12 month advance program is dead and gone after January 1st.

As one of their top producers last year (that's what my rep told me) they are offering a limited number of agents a token 3 month advance to replace it. I no longer need these so am just going As Earned for all my business.

If there are IMOs offering advances it will be on their own nickel so you will have to assign commissions and then worry about getting paid-given the risk of chargeback to the IMOs I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole.

So, FML2, you're saying that you would go direct, even if commissions are higher through the IMO? Through the IMO I get 9% and directly through Assurant I get 8%. But on supplemental stuff, I would only get 45% from Assurant, versus 60% from the IMO. Would it sway you if the IMO is and has been a very strong, large IMO for many years?

 

[FLM2]

So, FML2, you're saying that you would go direct, even if commissions are higher through the IMO? Through the IMO I get 9% and directly through Assurant I get 8%. But on supplemental stuff, I would only get 45% from Assurant, versus 60% from the IMO. Would it sway you if the IMO is and has been a very strong, large IMO for many years?

I'm already direct with Assurant (never through an IMO) and have moved away from IMOs for my other companies over the past six months so all my contracts are direct.

You don't get something for nothing in the insurance business. When I've been involved with large IMOs I had to assign commissions to get higher than street level and will never do that again.

If you want more money and with what I perceive as more hassles then it's an easy decision for you; I've made mine (to be direct) and don't care enough about the extra commissions for it to matter to me. The certainty of getting paid gives me more freedom to look at other opportunities to expand my business that could far outweigh the marginally higher commissions, particularly since I'm already at the higher level for Assurant supplemental that you quote.

 

[Gabe9175]

I understand that there are different arrangements out there but the one we have is different than what I have read on this post. Our arrangement pays a 6 month advance on the entire Major Medical premium including the subsidized portion. Accident, CHS, CI, and Dental all pay 12 month advances with a $600 advance cap. The more agents I talk to the more versions I hear. I suppose this does depend on if they are on the MGA channel or the RSD channel.

 

[zidannkh]

i doint think that you have..