Universal Life with No Lapse Guarantees

[BatonRougeChicken]

Which carriers are you guys using for GUL products?

Cheapest? Most lenient underwriting? etc, thanks!

 

[dgoldenz]

Which carriers are you guys using for GUL products?

Cheapest? Most lenient underwriting? etc, thanks!

Depends on the underwriting issues (height/weight, BP, cholesterol, family history, etc), age, and amount. Aviva, Banner, West Coast Life, John Hancock, Sun Life, Lincoln National, Transamerica, ING, Prudential, and Genworth are all pretty competitive.

 

[Robert Barney]

Compulife's comparison software includes no lapse UL products from a number of companies.

Click here for a 30 day free trial. That will give you the lay of the land:

Compulife ® Software Inc.

 

[BatonRougeChicken]

Depends on the underwriting issues (height/weight, BP, cholesterol, family history, etc), age, and amount. Aviva, Banner, West Coast Life, John Hancock, Sun Life, Lincoln National, Transamerica, ING, Prudential, and Genworth are all pretty competitive.

Any of these carriers allow me to be a direct broker? Or do I have to go through a GA and get haircutted?

 

[Robert Barney]

Any of these carriers allow me to be a direct broker? Or do I have to go through a GA and get haircutted?

Gee, another agent who is more worried about what someone else is making, rather than focussing on what he is making.

Good business people understand that for business to be successful, everyone involved in the transaction has to make a profit.

I used to get a similar question from reporters, who would ask me which companies sell direct to the consumer rather than through agents. The assumption was that if an agent was not involved, and a commission wasn't being paid, the product must be cheaper. Really?

How about you just look at the price of the product, compare that to the price of another product, and quit worrying about who gets paid what. If you eliminate the agent then someone else has to spend time with the consumer to sell the policy. Do those people work for nothing?

Back to the GA. Why do you suppose companies appoint GA's? Do you think it is because they add value to the sale, or are they just taking a slice off the top like mobsters?

The fact is that if a life company deals with agents directly, then that company will have to have staff to answer all the mundane questions which agents typically have about the products that they have for sale. Do you guys sell term insurance? What kinds, how is it sold, etc., etc., etc.?

A GA provides that service for no fixed overhead cost to a life company. If the GA produces nothing, it costs the company nothing. If the company has a manager doing the same thing, and the manager produces nothing, then the cost of the manager has to still be paid and that cost is in the product price.

So the GA plays a role, and if the life company doesn't have a GA, then it will need to employ more marketing staff, people who do not work for free.

And after years of doing this stuff, companies have discovered that paying commission to agents to sell policies, and commissions to GA's to manage/market, is much less expensive than having their own staff to do so - which is why life companies with the most competitive products (price and commission), sell through agents and distribute through GAs.

So my suggestion is to look at the commission that you are being offered by one company, and compare that to the commission being offered by other companies, and see which is better. Quit worrying who gets what before you get your commission.

 

[LGilmore]

Robert, something we actually agree on. Good points made.

 

[Newby]

I have moved several of my contracts from direct to a GA because the GA can offer me higher commissions.

 

[Guest]

And after years of doing this stuff, companies have discovered that paying commission to agents to sell policies, and commissions to GA's to manage/market, is much less expensive than having their own staff to do so - which is why life companies with the most competitive products (price and commission), sell through agents and distribute through GAs.

I don't know about product price, but there are some very profitable companies that do not use the GA distribution model.... Ohio National, Midland Life, Illinois Mutual, etc.

One problem with the GA distribution model that has been told to me by an insurance exec in New York last week is that the GA OFTEN has more "access" to the agent than the carrier has.

For example, if you are signed up with Brokers Alliance and have a contract with them with West Coast, WCL can't send you weekly email blasts unless they go through BA. I talked to WCL about why I never hear "stuff" from them and they say BA is the gatekeeper.

I don't know if all GAs work this way with all carriers. I do know that I get a ton of stuff from Ohio National

Many times carriers don't even HAVE up-to-date agent email addresses as they rely on their GAs to take care of all of that mess. Thus, if you are a carrier and you have a new product you might have to pay a GA to do an email blast to all of its agents.

I get the feeling there is a love-hate relationship between GAs and carriers the same as there is one between GAs and agents. When it works it works well, but when it doesn't it's a nightmare.

 

[BNTRS]

I get the feeling there is a love-hate relationship between GAs and carriers the same as there is one between GAs and agents. When it works it works well, but when it doesn't it's a nightmare.

Yes, yes, and YES! Just like there are bad agents, there are bad GAs. The crappy part is that sometimes (often) if you are in an area with a bad GA, you might not have a lot of choice in changing. It's also true that just because a GA isn't awesome for you, they are universally bad.

Speaking of Ohio National, I always thought they were a deal direct company, but I've finally come to a point where I'm thinking about possibly using them, but when I requested information, I got contacted by what looked to me like a GA near me in Massachusetts.

 

[Norwayguy]

Yes, yes, and YES! Just like there are bad agents, there are bad GAs. The crappy part is that sometimes (often) if you are in an area with a bad GA, you might not have a lot of choice in changing. It's also true that just because a GA isn't awesome for you, they are universally bad.

Speaking of Ohio National, I always thought they were a deal direct company, but I've finally come to a point where I'm thinking about possibly using them, but when I requested information, I got contacted by what looked to me like a GA near me in Massachusetts.

I guess my question is who cares about GAs most of the time I have my contracts through a GA, I still can and do call the company direct for most of my needs.