1,001 agents. There are almost half that many registered on this forum alone.
How difficult would it be to sign up 1,001 agents? I can see the ad now.
Easily Earn $130.000 in the next 6 months.
Write only four applications per day for $15,000 worth of no costlife insurance. The customer never, ever has to pay a premium! You heard me right, a $15,000 life insurancepolicy and the individual never pays a dime. If you think that you can "give" this policy away to people between 65 and 85, I will pay you $250 per application, in American money. You must be "above ground", still breathing, and have an insurance license. Work from home in your underwear and watch the money roll in.
There are over 7,000 licensed agent just in Missouri.
------------------------------------
"The Perfect Contact Management Program (CMP) for the Insurance Professional" www.YourInsuranceOffice.com
877.633.0808
Last edited by STIBROKER@AUSTIN.RR.COM : 05-05-2007 at 08:22 AM.
The product is already on the streets in a few states.
The insurable interest is the lienholder (in a manner of speaking), the one who is paying the premium. This is no different from a bank that loans you money and then wants a collateral assignment of the policy proceeds to pay off the loan.
But it is different in that there is a profit motive here for the insured to die sooner rather than later.
Most carriers did away with war clauses a long time ago, but some have resurrected them in light of the recent conflict in the middle east.
I haven't followed this thread in several days. You will probably recall I was one of the first to call BS on the deal. Put up the links for COLI & SOLI.
Personally, I think the entire thing is a bunch of crap and some agents are going to get their genitals in a wringer if they follow thru.
Thats what I am saying ....if a dime does not go to the insureds family or bury them then whats the point......I can see it now....."meemaw just called and said not to worry about her see got life insurance"......meemaw dies and the kids call the insurance co....pissed off relatives.....lawsuit....even if this deal gets that far before the doi's start shutting this down.....
I was responding to the "insurable interest" flag waiving. That is a red herring. Has nothing to do with the underlying "program".
There are so many fleas on this dog that the insurable interest issue is a non-issue.
I can see how some old farts would warm up to the idea of a free burial policy. However, all the other junk that goes along with this, not to mention the double secret probation, I can tell you but I have to kill you crap, that this thing will never get legs.
Honestagent, I found your post interesting but the overuse (if not misuse) of whom rattled my brain. According to The New Oxford American Dictionary, who forms the subjunctive case and so should be used in the subject position. the form whom, on the other hand forms the objective case, and so should be used in the object position in a sentence. In modern English the normal practice is to use who instead of whom.
Following this thread has indeed been interesting.
I live in the little Village of Pinehurst. If you are a golfer, then you probably know about Pinehurst.
I, and many agents in the area, know of Ali up in Raleigh. That is reason enough not to get involved.
Enough said.
why is that enough said? I am also in NC and we work Raleigh and have not heard of a problem with him. We know agents that have contracted with him in the past and not had problems with Medicare Advantage.
I am not saying this product is one way or another... just wondering why you made that comment?
Honestagent, I found your post interesting but the overuse (if not misuse) of whom rattled my brain. According to The New Oxford American Dictionary, who forms the subjunctive case and so should be used in the subject position. the form whom, on the other hand forms the objective case, and so should be used in the object position in a sentence. In modern English the normal practice is to use who instead of whom.
Class dismissed.
You are indeed correct. In fact, it should also be worthy noting according to Analyzing English Grammar Third Edition by: Klammer, Shulz, and Volpe, approved by mulitfarious linguistic Ph.D practicing instructors and further, this book is the teaching of English grammar to teachers specializing in the rubric of writing solely at the post graduate level, while having the accredidation of the Columbia Journalism Review, additionally also speaking as a former Secodary Certified English Teacher, with past professional contractual teaching experience - prepositions take objects. So you know, prepositions, words like, 'to, from, and for,' to enumerate a few take the ojective case, which slots in the subjective case when answering the indirective objects of 'to whom,' or 'for whom' the object is performed.
Here's a quick snapshot. I hope this puts it all in perspective for you.
Traditional grammars (yes the plural here, grammars) somtimes tried to define indirect objects in terms of meaning as the 'recipient of the direct object,' or that 'to whom or for whom' the action is performed. Linguists today would say the indirect object is usually the 'recipient' or 'beneiciary,' something I feel we all to can relate. Okay, so what does this mean?
It may help you to remember to ask 'what' to identify the direct object and 'to whom' or 'for whom' for the indirect object. These 2 techniques (given to you today at no cost, btw) will help determine the slot for usage of subjective or objective class. So let's use a simple example to answer the question of 'what,' in this case.
Illustrated example: What did Maria give George? (direct object would be gift) Now, to test this, you would say, To whom did Maria give a gift? The indirect object is: George of course!
Now, I ask, as a teacher, to take this concept and apply this technique to my preceding post to that you referred. This should help you. And if it does not, then:
I can slice and dice this in a number of ways. If you would like more information, my hourly fee is $300.00 and as extra benefit for you, I will personally provide you with an added value of 10% off on our second consultation. I do this for eager learners!
Any other questions, please pm me as this thread should be allocated strictly to the zero premium concept and product.
I thank you kindly.
H.A.
Last edited by honestagent : 04-25-2007 at 08:10 PM.
Originally Posted by arnguy Honestagent, I found your post interesting but the overuse (if not misuse) of whom rattled my brain. According to The New Oxford American Dictionary, who forms the subjunctive case and so should be used in the subject position. the form whom, on the other hand forms the objective case, and so should be used in the object position in a sentence. In modern English the normal practice is to use who instead of whom.
Class dismissed.
You are indeed correct. In fact, it should also be worthy noting according to Analyzing English Grammar Third Edition by: Klammer, Shulz, and Volpe, approved by mulitfarious linguistic Ph.D practicing instructors and further, this book is the teaching of English grammar to teachers specializing in the rubric of writing solely at the post graduate level, while having the accredidation of the Columbia Journalism Review, additionally also speaking as a former Secodary Certified English Teacher, with past professional contractual teaching experience - prepositions take objects. So you know, prepositions, words like, 'to, from, and for,' to enumerate a few take the ojective case, which slots in the subjective case when answering the indirective objects of 'to whom,' or 'for whom' the object is performed.
Here's a quick snapshot. I hope this puts it all in perspective for you.
Traditional grammars (yes the plural here, grammars) somtimes tried to define indirect objects in terms of meaning as the 'recipient of the direct object,' or that 'to whom or for whom' the action is performed. Linguists today would say the indirect object is usually the 'recipient' or 'beneiciary,' something I feel we all to can relate. Okay, so what does this mean?
It may help you to remember to ask 'what' to identify the direct object and 'to whom' or 'for whom' for the indirect object. These 2 techniques (given to you today at no cost, btw) will help determine the slot for usage of subjective or objective class. So let's use a simple example to answer the question of 'what,' in this case.
Illustrated example: What did Maria give George? (direct object would be gift) Now, to test this, you would say, To whom did Maria give a gift? The indirect object is: George of course!
Now, I ask, as a teacher, to take this concept and apply this technique to my preceding post to that you referred. This should help you. And if it does not, then:
I can slice and dice this in a number of ways. If you would like more information, my hourly fee is $300.00 and as extra benefit for you, I will personally provide you with an added value of 10% off on our second consultation. I do this for eager learners!
Any other questions, please pm me as this thread should be allocated strictly to the zero premium concept and product.
I thank you kindly.
H.A.
Please limit this to insurance related items only. Leave personal soap boxes off this board. Especially grammar lessons. I feel like I just got in the middle of rush hour road rage. Please?
As I read the dialog on this board, I see what reminds me of sports analysts. They are so positive about what a team is going to do, how they will finish, who will be the most, best etc. They have absolutely no way of knowing and yet they are so emphatic and dogmatic. Why is there so much clamor when we will know something in a matter of days? There have been some pretty low blows fired at people when NO ONE on this board really knows ALL the details. Time is going to be the tell. I am not saying that we should all be blind fools; but why the dogmatic views when they are (at best) mere speculation? Maybe there are related insurance laws we don't know about that cover this and don't violate insurable interest and other related issues. One person said that somehow the beneficiaries would get no money and the investor would take all. That has never been voiced by the company as even a possibility. If this is legit, it is going to be awesome! If not, it will be another passing wave. Just because we don't understand something-YET doesn't make it a "dog with fleas." I am hoping while yet planning and working if it doesn't materialize. Until the thing is out, it is all pretty much just "shooting in the dark."
Wow there has been alot of speculation going on here -- the recruiting the agents on 3 levels is a new one for me --- I was told by my hierchy that you have to be licensed in the state that the agent is in and if you are a manager you get the override -- and it was 25 dollars -- now if you are an FMO or MGA with 1000/s of agents that is where the larger override comes in -- depending on how many agents the agency gets signed up then they either get 25, 50 or 75 dollars. I have a conference call at 10 in the morning tomorrow and I will ask the questions to confirm this.
------------------------------------
You won't know unless you ask!!!!
email me at mdonaldson@insurer.com
Mary D.
I like that view. I think...what we have hear is an expansion team trying to sell tickets. The product stinks, but the fans are excited and will come to the games...for a while. Then at some point and many losses later, reality sets in and the fans stay home.
Linear Mode
