benseattle
Expert
- 58
I've long understood that mutual companies are a far better deal for the consumer than life insurance sold by stock companies... mainly because of the dividends but also because stock companies answer to the stockholders while mutual companies operate for the benefit of the policyholder.
Does this make sense... do we agree on this?
My real question is: with stock companies such as Metlife, Prudential and Principal among the largest most successful in the industry, do they offer the policyholder any benefits NOT provided by the mutuals?
Aside from what I mentioned above, are there any other appreciable differences?
Does this make sense... do we agree on this?
My real question is: with stock companies such as Metlife, Prudential and Principal among the largest most successful in the industry, do they offer the policyholder any benefits NOT provided by the mutuals?
Aside from what I mentioned above, are there any other appreciable differences?