Seeking a wide opinion about Primerica
Anthony F. Nelson
I've been pitched on the 'next big thing'; what I need is data, opinion if
you will, of what the heck it's all about.
I reside in the fourth largest city in America and can assure you there are
more prospects than time. What worry's me about adopting a mentality of go
forth without hesitation is the obvious fact that as I didn't invent this
program, I am unaware of what the real downers of becoming a "Captive Agent"
with this company. They appear well funded, so why would they farm out the
real gut work to idiot newbies like myself. The intuitive guess is that it
is far more profitable to extract sign up fee's, etc. and then have a few
contracts come in that will last way longer than the average hang time of
the "Captive Agent". Why wouldn't they use the most efficient distribution
methodologies to reach this 'huge surplus of folks in the boomer
demographic'. (My words, not theirs!)
Sell me on why I should commit to PFS for the immediate and five year
horizon. I have one business already as a Manufacturer's Representative
providing marketing & sales services for over forty companies and I can tell
you hard work, coupled with luck, moxy and the fact that the sector I work
in is food, brings in the paycheck.
--
Visit our website at http://ingredients.home.att.net
Robert C. Thomas
<Ib4O4.37791$WF.18...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> Folks in the ether . . .
>
> I've been pitched on the 'next big thing'; what I need is data, opinion
if
> you will, of what the heck it's all about.
>
opinions, one, that they are the representatives of the Messiah, with a
mission to educate the country about the underhanded, unprincipled agents
of the industry, or, two, that they represent the Antichrist. Truth, of
course, lies somewhere in between.
First, they are an MLM, or network marketing company. If you are up for
that, no problem, except for the facts that this kind of organization
primarily attracts "builders" and most of the training is on how to build.
This frequently leaves the best interests of the individual client taking
second place, or poorly served by an ill trained agent.
Second, they are, in essence, a single solution company in the "retirement
planning" sense. Their approach, Buy Term and Invest the Difference (BTID)
is, indeed, a very good program for very many, especially, working, people.
It is NOT however the only, nor is it the best, solution for many people,
especially the affluent.
Third, they are near universally held in contempt and/or hated by the rest
of the industry. If you can live with that, and be content that BTID
serves many people very well, concentrating upon them, you might be happy
with them. If you want the respect of the rest of the industry, or would
like to serve more than those for whom BTID is the best solution, forget
it.
I am not, nor have I ever been a Primerica agent. (Just so you know).
cheers
bob
SCat999999
>is far more profitable to extract sign up fee's, etc. and then have a few
>contracts come in that will last way longer than the average hang time of
>the "Captive Agent".
Trust your gut feeling on this. That's the name of the game. Collect some fees,
sell policies to the newbies friends and relatives (while letting him watch as
training) and then keep whatever business sticks after the newbie leaves.
>Sell me on why I should commit to PFS for the immediate and five year
>horizon. I have one business already as a Manufacturer's Representative
>providing marketing & sales services for over forty companies and I can tell
>you hard work, coupled with luck, moxy and the fact that the sector I work
in is food, brings in the paycheck.
I wouldn't. Since you are already in sales, you are already in control of your
income. Time spent on this"opportunity" will only take you away from your
primary selling business. You're obviously already an independent contractor so
you have nothing to gain. But you have a lot to lose. If you are thinking you
already have a client base to sell PFS's products to, you may find that you end
up losing them as clients for your primary business. PFS products don't offer
solutions to most business insurance needs. And trying to shoehorn their
philosophies into inappropriate situations will ruin the credibility and
relationships you've been working to build.
Now if you were thinking about a career change...that's a different issue. But
they still wouldn't be my choice.
Steve, LUTCF
USMCPFS
>That's the name of the game. Collect some fees,>
What fee's are you referring to? Are you suggesting that the $199.00 is a
profit center? In many states the prelicensing course and state exam is well in
excess of $199.00. Our new associates do not pay these fees for licensing.
>sell policies to the newbies friends and relatives (while letting him watch
>as
>training) and then keep whatever business sticks after the newbie leaves.>
Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens throughout the industry. Steve,
you are not actually suggesting that most agents make it long term in this
business, are you? As you and I both know (and have discussed many times) the
atttrition rate within this industry is staggering.
Chris Hesenflow
a hard time with some of the folks who post in this group that are so
negative about Primerica. Primerica is the #1 term insurance company in the
country, and what is wrong with term, the vast majority of
(objective)financial experts agree that for most, term is the way to go.
How about Smith Barney, the #2 brokerage firm in the US, been around for
ages, brokered some of the largest mergers in recent history.
The Travelers companies, simple interest loans, variable annuities.
If you are already in sales, hey that's great, you would probably do
terrific as a Primerica rep (or anywhere else). And as far as your market,
I don't believe Primerica even targets business as their market, it is
primarily middle class America.
And if you are interested in just collecting a paycheck, stay with your
current position, but do you have the opportunity to own a franchise in your
current company? Or could you decide to sell your book of business after 10
years or so?
Also, if you are interested in just being an insurance agent, I don't
believe that Primerica would be the place to be, term policies do not pay
high commissions, however, if you are interested in developing a business of
your own, it might be for you. But you must go beyond a simple insurance
license. You must get Series 6, 63 and 26 licenses for mutual funds,
something most "insurance" agents cannot provide their clients, so.. their
answer to everything from retirement to college funding tends to be cash
value life insurance. The argument is that it is "forced savings", which I
agree most people do need, however, if someone cancels their cash value life
policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings? You are probably
better off buying an insurance policy while you need it, then setting up
your mutual funds for retirement or whatever, at the same time on an
automatic draft using the dollar cost averaging method. Your investments
would grow much faster if invested directly in a fund than inside an
insurance policy, wouldn't you agree?
I don't want to get into a term vs. cv issue, however, Primerica does bring
much to the table in terms of a full package of products. There are
probably those unprofessional people in Primerica, however, wherever you go,
there are unprofessional people, just read the papers.
In addition, most folks don't know where to save money, most don't know how
to accelerate debt, most people don't understand their life insurance
policy, because it's not in the respective industries best interest to
explain it to them.
I would personally investigate before making a final decision, talk to
someone who has actually done well in Primerica, but also talk to someone
who failed, get both ends of the scale to find out what type of motivation
you have and don't rely on a people who post to a newsgroup.
best of luck to you whatever you decide.
Chris
"SCat999999" <scat9...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000428090422...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
> >The intuitive guess is that it
> >is far more profitable to extract sign up fee's, etc. and then have a few
> >contracts come in that will last way longer than the average hang time of
> >the "Captive Agent".
>
> Trust your gut feeling on this. That's the name of the game. Collect some
fees,
> sell policies to the newbies friends and relatives (while letting him
watch as
> training) and then keep whatever business sticks after the newbie leaves.
>
Brent D. Gardner
>you are not actually suggesting that most agents make it long term in this
>business, are you? As you and I both know (and have discussed many times) the
>atttrition rate within this industry is staggering.
I learned something new last week at my annual partners conference with my
broker/dealer. The people who "failed" in the insurance industry who then went
on to be securities brokers (and vice-versa), or to be fee based, or fee only,
financial planners and advisors, is rather large.
In other words, the attrition rate isn't near what we think it is. Agents,
registered reps, brokers, et al., tend to change positions, accept promotions
(to salaried jobs like wholesaling), or change course -- but remaining in the
financial services community. Surely the experience of selling life insurance
added to their skills that helped them get the job they have now.
I'm not countering Semp's arguement -- just adding flavor. I still think the
attrition rate is too high, but last week I was surrounded by over a hundred
"failed" insurance agents who are now independent fee based financial advisors
-- many who make well in excess of six figures AFTER business expenses and
income taxes. :-)
Brent D. Gardner
http://www.gardnerfinancialgroup.com/
Money is flat and meant to be piled high-Scottish Proverb
Brent D. Gardner
>Primerica is the #1 term insurance company in the
>country
#1 in what? Premium? Policies? Average face amount? Persistency? Number of
claims denied???
>term policies do not pay
>high commissions,
Incorrect. Term pays just as much, if not more, than most other kinds of
insurance, including cash value. Any FULL TIME agent knows this.
>You must get Series 6, 63 and 26 licenses for mutual funds,
>something most "insurance" agents cannot provide their clients, so
Incorrect. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time. It
looks funny on a cartoon, but in real life it's a sign of a lack of personal
integrity. Some agents don't sell securities. Some securities brokers don't
sell insurance. These people are specialists -- and will blow the amateurs out
of the water. DO NOT presume that because you sell MORE products that you're
somehow better -- most intelligent adults know that you're not.
>their
>answer to everything from retirement to college funding tends to be cash
>value life insurance.
Incorrect. Professionals evaluate and use ALL the tools available -- and if
that means permanent insurance, then so be it. Amateurs limit their offerings
to overpriced products that do NOT solve all the problems.
>The argument is that it is "forced savings", which I
>agree most people do need, however, if someone cancels their cash value life
>policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings?
Forced savings is merely ONE of the advantages of cash value life insurance.
You've obviously recently graduated from PFS elementary and you've heard this
point of attack repeated many times. In reality, it's rarely used by the FULL
TIME professionals -- except where it's needed.
>Your investments
>would grow much faster if invested directly in a fund than inside an
>insurance policy, wouldn't you agree?
Agree? Try PROVING and then providing a personal GUARANTEE to back up your
assertion. If you can't do that, then you need to go back to your day job.
>I don't want to get into a term vs. cv issue,
Why not? You already opened your mouth! Does the taste of shoe leather make you
gag? Or is it that extra "flavor" you stepped in before inserting the shoe?
>There are
>probably those unprofessional people in Primerica
Let me help you. Remove the word "probably" from the above sentence and you'll
be 100% correct.
>most people don't understand their life insurance
>policy, because it's not in the respective industries best interest to
>explain it to them.
Bull<cough>hit! Ever hear of due diligence? How about suitability? People
understand these products as much, or as little, as they see fit -- with the
help of a FULL TIME professional. Amateurs CANNOT adequately explain all of the
various types of policies because they don't have the time, nor the
wherewithal, or the resources from which to draw upon. Instead, the rely on
"twisting" (a criminal act) and material misrepresentations and misleading
double talk taught by people who have made their living by committing criminal
acts.
Paul Maffia
>If you are seeking a wide opinion on Primerica, okay, here's mine. I have
>a hard time with some of the folks who post in this group that are so
>negative about Primerica. Primerica is the #1 term insurance company in the
>country, and what is wrong with term, the vast majority of
>(objective)financial experts agree that for most, term is the way to go.
>How about Smith Barney, the #2 brokerage firm in the US, been around for
>ages, brokered some of the largest mergers in recent history.
>The Travelers companies, simple interest loans, variable annuities.
What do Smith Barney and Travelers got to do with Primerica?
Smith Barney and Travelers each, and independently of PFS, produce far
more revenue and profits for CitiCorp than PFS does. And remember PFS is a
subsidiary of Primerica, which itself is a subsidiary of CitiCorp. PFS is
further down the totem pole than SB or Travelers in the CitiCorp
organization.
All three are independent subsidiaries of CitiCorp. Primerica agents
licensed to sell investment products can sell Smith Barney Mutual funds.
But so can just about anyone licensed to sell mutual funds.
PFS reps can and do sell some Travelers insurance products but not any of
its cash value polices which it sells a bucketful of every year, possibly
even more in face value than all the PFS agents sell combined.
>And if you are interested in just collecting a paycheck, stay with your
>current position, but do you have the opportunity to own a franchise in your
>current company? Or could you decide to sell your book of business after 10
>years or so?
What difference does it make if someone is a captive agent of any other
insurance company or a franchisee of PFS (not Primerica)?
In either case the relationship can be terminated by the company at any
time for cause and with PFS for any reason.
>Also, if you are interested in just being an insurance agent, I don't
>believe that Primerica would be the place to be, term policies do not pay
>high commissions, however, if you are interested in developing a business of
>your own, it might be for you. But you must go beyond a simple insurance
>license. You must get Series 6, 63 and 26 licenses for mutual funds,
>something most "insurance" agents cannot provide their clients, so.. their
>answer to everything from retirement to college funding tends to be cash
>value life insurance. The argument is that it is "forced savings", which I
>agree most people do need, however, if someone cancels their cash value life
>policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings? You are probably
>better off buying an insurance policy while you need it, then setting up
>your mutual funds for retirement or whatever, at the same time on an
>automatic draft using the dollar cost averaging method. Your investments
>would grow much faster if invested directly in a fund than inside an
>insurance policy, wouldn't you agree?
And what happens if a person has set up an automatic draft program and then
cancels it?
Think about it. Your attempt to use this as a defense for the way
Primerica does business is worthless as a comparison.
That is my objection to so many who attempt to defend PFS. They are
strictly amateurs who do such a poor job they make the company look bad.
>I don't want to get into a term vs. cv issue, however, Primerica does bring
>much to the table in terms of a full package of products. There are
>probably those unprofessional people in Primerica, however, wherever you go,
>there are unprofessional people, just read the papers.
PFS may have much a trained agent can bring to the table. But as you
point out (and to put it differently), any company is only as good as the
company rep. a particular individual meets and must deal with. and when
that rep. is as amateurish as you are, what more needs to be said?
>In addition, most folks don't know where to save money, most don't know how
>to accelerate debt, most people don't understand their life insurance
>policy, because it's not in the respective industries best interest to
>explain it to them.
The last statement is hyperbolic nonsense.
--
Paul M.
Robert C. Thomas
<e_5Q4.845$7B6....@nntp1.onemain.com>...
> If you are seeking a wide opinion on Primerica, okay, here's mine. I
have
> a hard time with some of the folks who post in this group that are so
> negative about Primerica.
That's OK. Many of us have a hard time with the ignorance of many of the
Primerica people who post here, as well as the arrogance of their firm
belief that they are the only "good guys". I, for one, particularly object
to the half truths and generally misleading lines such as, "They lend you
your own money".
Primerica is the #1 term insurance company in the
> country, and what is wrong with term, the vast majority of
> (objective)financial experts agree that for most, term is the way to go.
>
Most traditional agents would freely agree that term "is the way to go"
provided your need is for temporary insurance. This may come as a
considerable surprise to most Primerica agents, but that is not the only
insurance need there is.
> How about Smith Barney, the #2 brokerage firm in the US, been around for
> ages, brokered some of the largest mergers in recent history.
>
There's nothing wrong with Smith Barney. It is, however, interesting that
every Primerica agent recommendation I've heard of is for a fund with 5.5%
load. '>)
> The Travelers companies, simple interest loans, variable annuities.
>
Interesting. You do realize that a variable annuity IS a mixed
investment/';insurance product........?
> If you are already in sales, hey that's great, you would probably do
> terrific as a Primerica rep (or anywhere else). And as far as your
market,
> I don't believe Primerica even targets business as their market, it is
> primarily middle class America.
>
Middle and lower class. They have, essentially nothing for the affluent.
> And if you are interested in just collecting a paycheck, stay with your
> current position, but do you have the opportunity to own a franchise in
your
> current company? Or could you decide to sell your book of business after
10
> years or so?
>
There are uncountable numbers of franchises that offer much the same thing.
> Also, if you are interested in just being an insurance agent, I don't
> believe that Primerica would be the place to be,
Probably true.
term policies do not pay
> high commissions,
Actually term policies pay much higher commissions than CV insurance. The
difference lies in the fact that term (only) costs less than permanent
life. Primerica agents make very good commissions, thank you very much, on
the mutual funds that accompany term in a BTID program. In point of fact,
total commissions for a given amount of money in, especially with the 5.5%
load on the mutual funds is greater than the commissions on a permanent
policy such as a Variable Universal Life policy, especially when it is set
up appropriately (below Target).
however, if you are interested in developing a business of
> your own, it might be for you.
That's true, it might be.
But you must go beyond a simple insurance
> license. You must get Series 6, 63 and 26 licenses for mutual funds,
You don't need a Series 26 to sell mutual funds. This is the license for a
Registered Principal to supervise mutual fund salesmen, i.e. subagents.
> something most "insurance" agents cannot provide their clients,
I don't believe that's quite true. Extremely large numbers of "insurance"
agents (as you called them) have their licenses, including Series 7.
so.. their
> answer to everything from retirement to college funding tends to be cash
> value life insurance.
This is a joke, right? In comparing Primerica to the traditional agency,
you imply that the traditional agents are a single solution entity? In
point of fact, most traditional agents with which I am familiar sell more
term than anything else. Vast numbers of BTID plans are sold by
traditional agents. They just don't think they invented BTID and are aware
that this program, as good as it is, does NOT solve ALL financial planning
needs.
The argument is that it is "forced savings", which I
> agree most people do need,
This is a very minor "argument". There are a myriad of others..........
however, if someone cancels their cash value life
> policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings?
And, the 75% of Primerica agents that cancel their mutual funds? What
about them? Where's their savings???
You are probably
> better off buying an insurance policy while you need it, then setting up
> your mutual funds for retirement or whatever, at the same time on an
> automatic draft using the dollar cost averaging method.
This is, indeed, possible. BTID is an extremely good program for most of
middle class America. It isn't, however, the ONLY way to go.
Your investments
> would grow much faster if invested directly in a fund than inside an
> insurance policy, wouldn't you agree?
>
That's rather a silly statement. Given that it can easily be essentially
the same fund, the growth is pretty much the same. If you are alluding to
the fact that not all the monthly payment goes into the fund in a VUL,
that's true. Neither does it all go into the fund in a BTID program.
First, it goes to pay for the term. Second, 5.5% goes to pay the load.
Please don't try to stack the deck here. This is the kind of
misinformation/misleading statement that most of us object to in the
Primerica kant. In addition, you somehow forgot to mention that the money
in an insurance policy can be accessed tax free (with certain
qualifications, i.e. if the policy lapses the money then becomes
taxable...not a good idea)
> I don't want to get into a term vs. cv issue,
That's a very good idea on your part. I have yet to meet a Primerica agent
who understands CV. Most have only a superficial understanding of their
own term.
however, Primerica does bring
> much to the table in terms of a full package of products. There are
> probably those unprofessional people in Primerica, however, wherever you
go,
> there are unprofessional people, just read the papers.
>
Is this an apology?
> In addition, most folks don't know where to save money, most don't know
how
> to accelerate debt, most people don't understand their life insurance
> policy, because it's not in the respective industries best interest to
> explain it to them.
>
Bull Crap! Most people don't understand because they don't listen. They
often hear what they want to hear.
> I would personally investigate before making a final decision,
Damn good idea!!!
talk to
> someone who has actually done well in Primerica, but also talk to someone
> who failed, get both ends of the scale to find out what type of
motivation
> you have and don't rely on a people who post to a newsgroup.
>
Does that include you????
> best of luck to you whatever you decide.
>
I would second that.
cheers
bob
USMCPFS
> Instead, the rely on
>"twisting" (a criminal act) and material misrepresentations and misleading
>double talk taught by people who have made their living by committing
>criminal
>acts.>
I'd disagree. What were the results of these alleged "criminal acts" and
specifically what were their names?
USMCPFS
>What do Smith Barney and Travelers got to do with Primerica?>
They are sister companies.
>And remember PFS is a
>subsidiary of Primerica, which itself is a subsidiary of CitiCorp. PFS is
>further down the totem pole than SB or Travelers in the CitiCorp
>organization.>
Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of Travelers
at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group. After
the acquistion of Citicorp the parents name again changed...this time to
Citigroup. PFS is a subsidiary of the parent.....just as Smith Barney and the
others are. There is no company between PFS and the parent. Read an annual
report for verification.
Also some of what PFS produces in cross-selling opportunities appears on the
affiliates bottom line not PFS's.
> possibly
>even more in face value than all the PFS agents sell combined.>
You are not serious, right?
Robert C. Thomas
<01bfb76c$be07dac0$010586cc@oemcomputer>...
>
> however, if someone cancels their cash value life
> > policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings?
>
> And, the 75% of Primerica agents that cancel their mutual funds? What
> about them? Where's their savings???
>
cheers
bob
PaulMaf
>Date: 5/8/00 10:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20000508133552...@ng-cc1.aol.com>
>
>>What do Smith Barney and Travelers got to do with Primerica?>
>
>They are sister companies.
If you did not notice that is exactly what I said. And the point, which seems
to escape you, is that a PFS agent invoking them, because they are sister
companies is strictly amateurish nonsense for the simple reason that although
they are related, they are completely and legally independent of each other.
>>And remember PFS is a
>>subsidiary of Primerica, which itself is a subsidiary of CitiCorp. PFS is
>>further down the totem pole than SB or Travelers in the CitiCorp
>>organization.>
>
>Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of Travelers
>at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group. After
>the acquistion of Citicorp the parents name again changed...this time to
>Citigroup. PFS is a subsidiary of the parent.....just as Smith Barney and the
>others are. There is no company between PFS and the parent. Read an annual
>report for verification.
I have andf I do.
>Also some of what PFS produces in cross-selling opportunities appears on the
>affiliates bottom line not PFS's.
Again, so what? If an independent sales person sells Smith Barney funds, it
shows up on SB's bottom line, not PFs's.
Cross selling related company products, is one of the reasons for all the
mergers that created CitiGroup.
That still changes nothing as far as the poihnt you were trying to make, i.e.
that somehow this makes PFs agents good per se.
>> possibly
>>even more in face value than all the PFS agents sell combined.>
>You are not serious, right?
Very, read CitiGroup's 10K.
SCat999999
>>high commissions,
>
>insurance, including cash value. Any FULL TIME agent knows this.
Brent..
Actually he's partially correct. He didn't say high commission rates. Term does
pay lower commission dollars solely because the premiums are lower. It would be
very difficult to survive just selling term insurance due to the low premiums
and non-commissionable policy fees on the real low priced stuff. The sad part
is that he probably didn't know WHY he was half right...lol
Steve,LUTCF
Brent D. Gardner
>I'd disagree. What were the results of these alleged "criminal acts" and
>specifically what were their names?
Disagree all you want. The State of Kansas Insurance Department has sent cease
and desist orders to many, many former PFS/ALW associates, affiliates, or
recent suckers - whatever you want to call them. The fines have been many, and
often sizeable.
I have on tape several pep rallies with multiple violations of the NASD Rules
of Fair Practice -- all of which were forwarded to the District Conduct
Committee. All the dope smokers and drug dealers actually speaking are back to
driving milk trucks and cashiering at the liquor store again as a result of our
sting.
This tape has on it nearly every "twisting" tactic known to man -- and from
what I gather, it's the way ALL PFS/ALW pep rallies are put on. Skip Bell's
experience in Washington shows that as recent as 1999, these "twisting" tactics
are still being taught -- and all one needs to do is check out a message board
or newsgroup to see that graduates of PFS elementary are being taught the same
"twisting" tactics to this day. I'm disgusted with the ignorance they are
taught as a matter of course. There is NO excuse for new agents being taught
to lie and cheat in this millenium -- except pure unadulterated greed without
regard for the consumer. Thank God I don't work the same market!
Anyone who wants this evidence can see my copies in my office.
SCat999999
>load on the mutual funds is greater than the commissions on a permanent
>policy such as a Variable Universal Life policy, especially when it is set
>up appropriately (below Target).
Bob,
How can you say that an appropriately set up VUL is BELOW target? VUL's work
best when they are at or ABOVE target, not underfunded.
Steve,LUTCF
Robert C. Thomas
<20000509081758...@ng-fw1.aol.com>...
seem to want to ignore the fact that a BTID program pays as much, usually
more, commission than any permanent life instrument.
Ignorance is bliss, except when you push it on others.
cheers
bob
Brent D. Gardner
>Term does
>pay lower commission dollars solely because the premiums are lower.
I like how Ted puts it: If you have $50 per month to spend on life insurance,
then you have $50 per month to spend. If term pays the same as permanent, then
the commission is the same. Except for the career companies, most term
insurance generally pays as much if not more on all but the smallest policies.
>It would be
>very difficult to survive just selling term insurance due to the low premiums
>and non-commissionable policy fees on the real low priced stuff.
The agents I know who sell term in the middle markets use the second tier
contracts that pay commish on the entire premium. I don't blame them, either.
USMCPFS
>The State of Kansas Insurance Department has sent cease
>and desist orders to many, many>
I know they have. In fact, they have sent many, many to agents of lots of
companies. You and I once went through this drill using the published complaint
figures for Kansas and two other states. Besides that... nearly everything
you've ever posted (including your tape of your dope smoking former schoolmate)
is extremely dated. I suggested to you years ago to turn in your tapes. We
don't want those guys around. Good job.
Skip Bell related his story as part of a post introducing a website from which
he later backed away from for reasons we all discussed at length. I consider
Skip a professional and never doubted his experience with his friend. Those
things have happened and will happen. But they have happened to many companies
and the results have been well documented.
USMCPFS
>If you did not notice that is exactly what I said.>
No actually you didn't. You suggested that they were lower on the totem pole.
They are a direct subsidiary.....just as the others.
>And the point, which seems
>to escape you, is that a PFS agent invoking them, because they are sister
>companies is strictly amateurish nonsense for the simple reason that although
>they are related, they are completely and legally independent of each other.>
First, I don't think it's amateurish to mention the affiliation. It's quite
common in the business world. The bigger point, which I think we agree on, is
that it would be illegal for a rep to suggest anything other than that their
company is standing on its own two feet financially.
>I have andf I do.>
I'm not sure what you are saying. If you do, in fact, have the annual report
you will see that your "totem pole" analogy is incorrect. I think you may not
understand that Primerica Corp. was Sandy Weill and his Generals and was PFS's
parent. Now Primerica Corp is CitiGroup.....which is PFS's parent.
>Again, so what? If an independent sales person sells Smith Barney funds, it
>shows up on SB's bottom line, not PFs's>
Absolutely. But an independent agent who sells SB will not have his bottom line
compared to SB's. Frequently, in newsgroups such as this, posters will compare
the bottom lines of PFS and SB. Internally, the relationship is clearly
understood. In recent weeks Sandy and Tom Jones have commented on our
contribution to the overall success.
>That still changes nothing as far as the poihnt you were trying to make, i.e.
>that somehow this makes PFs agents good per se.>
I've made no such points. My comments have always been limited to correcting
inaccurate information. If I ever comment on anything that is my opinion.....I
clearly label it as such.
>Very, read CitiGroup's 10K.>
I do not see where it states Travelers sells more face amount. Could you post
some figures please?
bskversky
"USMCPFS" <usm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:958200026.26736.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
bskversky
"Brent D. Gardner" <gowil...@aol.comrenosux> wrote in message
news:958199883.29555.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Terry Burnett
> Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of
Travelers
> at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group.
I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. From all appearances, it was
Travelers that acquired Primerica. I'm quite sure that their billions of
assets (from selling cash value products) made 20-something-year-old
Primerica look quite small by comparison. The fact that Sandy Weill came
out on top is actually beside the point.
By the way, I would like to commend you on the professional nature of your
posts. Unfortunately, your reluctance to identify yourself affects your
credibility somewhat . . .
TLB
USMCPFS
Brent:
>I like how Ted puts it: If you have $50 per month to spend on life
insurance,
then you have $50 per month to spend.>
Yes. But would you agree that the client might decide to spend $15 or $20/mo
for term insurance and the rest for a mutual fund? It's not always a dollar for
dollar comparison. In those cases where it is I would agree that the term
policy may pay more in commissions.
USMCPFS
>So, Semp is over here spreading the PFS gospel. Good to see you here, Semp.>
Likewise, Ben. How have you been? How's that grandson?
Actually, I've not spread any gospel over here. I just responded to a couple of
posts I thought were erroneous. Nothing more.
Paul Maffia
>USMCPFS <usm...@aol.com> wrote
>> Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of
>Travelers
>> at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group.
>I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. From all appearances, it was
>Travelers that acquired Primerica. I'm quite sure that their billions of
>assets (from selling cash value products) made 20-something-year-old
>Primerica look quite small by comparison. The fact that Sandy Weill came
>out on top is actually beside the point.
Sorry Terry. Primerica BOUGHT the Travelers, which was in financial
difficulties. After the purchase, the Corporation's name was changed to
Travelers Corp. The Travelers Insurance Company was a subsidiary of
Tavelers Corp (after some reorganization to rationalize the
Corporate structure), The old Primerica became a separate subsidiary.
CitiCorp and Travelers then merged to form CitiGroup.
--
Paul M.
Brent D. Gardner
>Yes. But would you agree that the client might decide to spend $15 or $20/mo
>for term insurance and the rest for a mutual fund? It's not always a dollar
>for
>dollar comparison. In those cases where it is I would agree that the term
>policy may pay more in commissions.
$15 or $20 per month? Although I have to admit I've sold policies for small
monthly premiums before, I don't prospect intentionally in this market. And
since I'm dealing with people who tend to save already, the purpose of our
discussions is to accumulate, create or transfer wealth on a tax advantaged
basis. If a person can only budget $50 per month for both life insurance AND
investments, then they need to start living within their means because the only
people who work full time and cannot save more than that are spending their
money on frivilous things.
I'm sure others may argue, but I've examined way too many situations where it
wasn't a lack of income, but a lack of discipline. People who lack discipline
aren't likely to ever need the products I sell -- namely, permanent life
insurance, disability income, long term care, or nonqualified annuities.
When I'm selling life insurance to a family, and I'm talking about term
insurance, I'm NOT talking about mutual funds -- as that should be a separate
discussion. Protection and investing in that situation should be separate, in
my opinion. People who mix the two at that level are amateurs who use
mythology to cloud the consumer's mind.
SCat999999
>aren't likely to ever need the products I sell -- namely, permanent life
>insurance, disability income, long term care, or nonqualified annuities.
Brent..
I don't think it's a question of NEED. If fact They probably need the products
more. I think if your statement was "People who lack discipline aren't ever
likely to BUY the products I sell...", it would be more accurate.
Steve,LUTCF
tenthlevel
USMCPFS wrote:
>
> Steve:
>
> >That's the name of the game. Collect some fees,>
>
> What fee's are you referring to? Are you suggesting that the $199.00 is a
> profit center? In many states the prelicensing course and state exam is well in
> excess of $199.00. Our new associates do not pay these fees for licensing.
It is a profit maker since a good number of Primerica's associates never
make it to the exam and do not get a refund after 30 days has passed.
>
> >sell policies to the newbies friends and relatives (while letting him watch
> >as
> >training) and then keep whatever business sticks after the newbie leaves.>
>
> Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens throughout the industry. Steve,
> you are not actually suggesting that most agents make it long term in this
> business, are you? As you and I both know (and have discussed many times) the
> atttrition rate within this industry is staggering.
This is a poor excuse for the indiscriminate hiring practices of the
MLM, Primerica. If agents were serious about their business they would
hire people who were appropriate instead of trying to convince
everything that breathes that they will make 6 figures in two years
time. The real reason for the high attrition rate in Primerica is that
agents are interested in the sales they can get by training a recruit in
the recruit's warm market.
tenthlevel
articles on the primerica hero, A.L. Williams:
Consumer Reports July 1986
:reporters attend an A.L. Williams training session at the Howard
Johnson with 200 hopeful
recruits. They come away from this early "opportunity meeting" with the
belief that "Williams agents don't shrink from overstating their case,
under-rating the value of competitive products, and pushing a mediocre
to poor product themselves.... The term policy Williams agents usually
sell is no bargain ... ranked at the
bottom of the term insurance ratings we published last month."
"Williams' agents wrongly focus on the premiums policy holders pay...not
on the policy's cost over time. As we've pointed out, this can be very
misleading, since a policy that has low initial premiums may be quite
expensive over the years."
The Sunday Sun in Georgetown Texas February 1, 1987 reports
"questionable life insurance sales practices by representatives of the
A.L. Williams Company have resulted in an alert memorandum directed to
the secretaries of the Army Navy and Air force." Apparently, the
military would not tolerate A.L. Williams agents who were in the
military committing "unauthorized solicitation on military
installations, coercion by senior military personnel in selling to
junior personnel, use of personal files to gain information for
insurance sales and failure to comply with state regulatory
requirements."
The Sun also reports that two insurance watch dog companies, A.M. Best,
and A.R.M.S, had their eyes on A.L. Williams Co.Arousing their curiosity
was the fact that "most of the computer print-out illustrations used by
A.L. Williams representatives, prepared by the home office of the
company, which displayed figures as to as to illustrated current and
future interest rates on the proposed investments in their annuities and
mutual funds, were not accurate, and the home office ... knew they were
not."
in Business Week, February 15, 1988 where BW refers to Williams as the
"P.T. Barnum of Life
Insurance" and says
"Art Williams doesn't seem to like Business Week anymore. They told the
truth about him....The Coach referred to that particular issue of
Business Week when he said: 'I'd go buy it off the newsstand, and burn
it up'" (p. 24).... [ALW an advocate of book burning?] Press recognizes
that "the problem with decreasing responsibility [Williams justification
for allowing life insurance to lapse at retirement age] is that it falls
apart as most people approach mortality. In reality, as life insurance
owners get into their late 60s or early 70s, the last thing they want to
give up is their life insurance (p. 24)."
October 1988
National Underwriter: Life and Health/Financial Services
The A.L. Williams Company is accused of distributing a booklet
containing
"false and misleading information about life insurance."
The booklet contains 12 misleading and deceptive points which are
misrepresentative and designed to
"induce people to lapse, forfeit or surrender their insurance."
The Insurance Commissioner of California said the violations were
grounds for revocation of Williams' license. The A.L. Williams Co.
issued an internal directive to stop issuing the booklet.
What were these deceptive claims that A.L. Williams Co. agents were
ordered to stop making?
That "the new Universal Life products are the latest sham." Deemed
defamatory and untrue.
that cash value is "asking the insured to give [the company] extra money
so he can give it back to the insured
in the future."
comparing values of cash value policies to investment vehicles: i.e.
comparing cash values in a life policy to a mutual fund--deceptive.
"you lose your cash values if you die" -- deemed false and misleading it
is "false and misleading ... to condemn all agents who have sold cash
value policies." [Not to mention defamatory].
false and misleading to maintain that "insurance companies loan policy
holders their own money...."
to maintain that cash value policies cost 4 to 5 times as much as term
policies is false and misleading "in that
...term policy premiums increase ... and usually exceed the premium on
cash value policies."
"no person could honestly sell a cash value policy to a family if his
commissions were not the determining
factor" deemed false and misleading as it suggests "that under no
circumstances would a cash value policy be
a better alternative to term...."
"there are many hidden charges in a Universal Life contract" deemed
false and misleading.
the booklet refers to a study by A.M. Best that shows cost per thousand
of various policies. "Best never
prepared a study that shows cost per thousand."
August, 1990
Business Week
"The insurance mogul steps down in the face of an FBI inquiry." This is
where Primerica and Sandy Weill step in. According to Business Week,
Primerica Corp., headed by Sandy Weill already owns a majority stake in
A.L. Williams, purchased through a complicated stock swap in 1988. The
other 30% was bought in November, 1989, again paid for in stock. "After
the buyout, Williams's official title was reduced to "sales consultant."
The controversy which led to the enquiry may have been, according to
Business Week, "that Williams saddled a competitors competitor with
1000s of phony insurance policies." That competitor was Randy Stelk.
Randy Stelk was fired by Williams and the two battled it out in
litigation for two years. Williams vowed to destroy Stelk and allegedly
sent a small army of phony agents over to Stelk's company to write about
$200,000 in bogus policies, collect the commissions and run, leaving
Stelk broke. Are these not the kind of tactics employed by major
destructive cults like Scientology?
http://members.home.net/fairbusiness/history.htm
USMCPFS wrote:
>
> Brent:
>
> > Instead, the rely on
> >"twisting" (a criminal act) and material misrepresentations and misleading
> >double talk taught by people who have made their living by committing
> >criminal
> >acts.>
>
Terry Burnett
> Sorry Terry. Primerica BOUGHT the Travelers, which was in financial
> difficulties.
Really? Well, if that's true, then I stand corrected. I haven't looked at
any CitiGroup annual reports, but maybe I should. :)
> CitiCorp and Travelers then merged to form CitiGroup.
Right. I knew about that. I also understand that CitiGroup has two CEO's,
Sandy Weill and the CitiCorp guy.
Thanks, Paul -- and my apologies to USMCPFS, whoever he is . . .
Terry
USMCPFS
>$15 or $20 per month? Although I have to admit I've sold policies for small
monthly premiums before, I don't prospect intentionally in this market>
You might have missed my point. You mentioned Ted's example of $50/month for a
CV policy and rightfully suggested that the same $50/mo for term might pay
higher commissions. I only used that example and suggested that an equal amount
of term might be purchased for less money with the remaining dollars invested
in an IRA. This alternative may actually pay less commissions on the same $50
monthly outlay.
>wasn't a lack of income, but a lack of discipline.>
For the most part I agree although I have certainly seen exceptions.
>When I'm selling life insurance to a family, and I'm talking about term
insurance, I'm NOT talking about mutual funds -- as that should be a separate
discussion.>
I agree. The mutual fund investment is always made during a subsequent
appointment. When I'm talking long-term investing I want that to be the total
focus of that discussion.
>People who mix the two at that level are amateurs who use
mythology to cloud the consumer's mind.>
I don't see it that way. I see them as poor salespersons who are likely to
experience problems with every blip in the market because their clients were
not focused. However, I cannot remember an example of explaining term insurance
where it was not asked where the "savings" is going to come from. I don't think
it requires any "mythology" to explain alternatives such as IRA's exist. But I
personally think it is imperative that the client understands we need to get
back together to discuss it in detail. I also believe that in some states it is
actually mandated that the sales be completed separately.
tenthlevel
>
> If you are seeking a wide opinion on Primerica, okay, here's mine. I have
> a hard time with some of the folks who post in this group that are so
> country, and what is wrong with term, the vast majority of
> (objective)financial experts agree that for most, term is the way to go.
There are many problems with these statements. Like most MLMs, the
company does well while the majority of the agents do not. The average
rep. income in Primerica is very low, but there are so many of them
that the company does well.
Also, Primerica's sales approach is to compare term to whole life using
an illustration they call Plan A, Plan B, and then attempt to replace
the client's whole life policy. They look at four points only in this
deceptive comparison:
1. the rate of return of a whole life policy in the first 2 to 4 years
(0%) compared to 12% return.
2. the rate of return after the policy interest kicks in (4-5%)
compared to an ongoing 12% rate of return.
3. I forget number 3: was it cost / $1000 of coverage?
4. they tell the client that the whole life company keeps their
"investment" if they die
In any event, this presentation does not comapre term to term or
mention that Primerica's term is very high-priced compared to other term
in the market. It is also very suggestive and misleading in the
suggestion that the client will get a steady 12% return.
>
> How about Smith Barney, the #2 brokerage firm in the US, been around for
> ages, brokered some of the largest mergers in recent history.
Again, this does not speak to the experience of the agents, whose
annual average income is quite low, under $10,000 / year.
>
> The Travelers companies, simple interest loans, variable annuities.
Travelers sells evil whole life don't they? Aren't they then in direct
competition with Primerica?
>
> If you are already in sales, hey that's great, you would probably do
> terrific as a Primerica rep (or anywhere else). And as far as your market,
> I don't believe Primerica even targets business as their market, it is
> primarily middle class America.
Which helps to explain the difficulty with keeping reps and paying them
a viable income. You have to make a lot of sales when the bulk of your
sales are tiny little investments and policies. Again, this help
explain why the company does well and the agents don't.
>
> And if you are interested in just collecting a paycheck, stay with your
> current position, but do you have the opportunity to own a franchise in your
> current company? Or could you decide to sell your book of business after 10
> years or so?
This is totally deceptive nonsense. Primerica is not a franchise, it
is an MLM. The Primerica Basic Agreement states that the rep. owns
neither the clients he secures or the people he recruits. And your
insinuation that their is something wrong in collecting a paycheck is a
ludicrous attempt to put down working people.
> Also, if you are interested in just being an insurance agent, I don't
> believe that Primerica would be the place to be, term policies do not pay
> high commissions, however, if you are interested in developing a business of
> your own, it might be for you.
This means developing a "downline" using the Amway model of MLM
business. Eventually, you will be able to make money from your
downline by selling them tickets to rah rah events and earn commissions
on Voicetel and other products you sell to your downline, like in
Amway. This is not a business of your own in the true sense of it. As
far as I know from viewing the Basic Agreement, Primerica owns the
clients and the recruits.
But you must go beyond a simple insurance
> license. You must get Series 6, 63 and 26 licenses for mutual funds,
> something most "insurance" agents cannot provide their clients, so.. their
> answer to everything from retirement to college funding tends to be cash
> value life insurance. The argument is that it is "forced savings", which I
> agree most people do need, however, if someone cancels their cash value life
> policy or lets it lapse, where's the forced savings? You are probably
> better off buying an insurance policy while you need it, then setting up
> your mutual funds for retirement or whatever, at the same time on an
> automatic draft using the dollar cost averaging method. Your investments
> would grow much faster if invested directly in a fund than inside an
> insurance policy, wouldn't you agree?
There's that nasty "wouldn't you agree?" statement. Ugh! That sends
shivers down my spine. Every Primerica rep is taught to say "wouldn't
you agree?? after making some suggestive argument in favor of their
products. The Primerica website states that PFAs are NOT planners, NOT
advisors, and NOT specialists in ANY area of finances, as goes so far
as to state that if you need planning, advising, or specialty services,
you should seek help from a LICENSED planner, which you are not, even
though you are obviously engaged in these activities. I think people
should follow the advice Primerica gives at www.pfsnet.com (see
Important disclosures) and seek out licensed professionals to advise
them, wouldn't YOU agree?
>
> I don't want to get into a term vs. cv issue, however, Primerica does bring
> much to the table in terms of a full package of products.
Even though that is what you do.
There are
> probably those unprofessional people in Primerica, however, wherever you go,
> there are unprofessional people, just read the papers.
As the Primerica website states, there are NO professional planners or
advisors in Primerica, there are only salespeople.
>
> In addition, most folks don't know where to save money, most don't know how
> to accelerate debt, most people don't understand their life insurance
> policy, because it's not in the respective industries best interest to
> explain it to them.
But it is in Primerica's best interest to replace your policies with
term, whether or not it is in the client's best interest to do so.
>
> I would personally investigate before making a final decision, talk to
> someone who has actually done well in Primerica, but also talk to someone
> who failed, get both ends of the scale to find out what type of motivation
> you have and don't rely on a people who post to a newsgroup.
There is some good advice: especially don't rely on people who post to
a newsgroup. LOL!
>
> best of luck to you whatever you decide.
>
> Chris
Bottom line: Primerica is an MLM like Amway. It's agents are do not
know the business they are in, let alone understand their competitors.
They are given information on a need to know basis and only learn the
truth of what each level of the business involves when they actually
reach that level. Sio someone who has not reached RVP does not know
that an RVP makes a good chunk of his money by selling products to his
own downline of agents. Its a terrible business to be in. I highly
discourage everyone from being involved with this particular MLM
company.
Paul McDonald
Terry Burnett wrote in message
<958309556.22613.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>USMCPFS <usm...@aol.com> wrote
>> Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of
>Travelers
>> at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group.
>
>I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. From all appearances, it was
>Travelers that acquired Primerica. I'm quite sure that their billions of
>assets (from selling cash value products) made 20-something-year-old
>Primerica look quite small by comparison. The fact that Sandy Weill came
>out on top is actually beside the point.
>
Actually, Primerica owned about 25% of Travelers Insurance stock back in
1993 or so, just after Traveler's de-mutilated. If you look through the
headlines of all the newspapers, they say things like "Primerica bought the
remaining stock in Travelers that it didn't already own." Further, the
shareholders of Travelers had to approve the buyout price.
Anyone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is obviously someone who
derives great fear from a company like Primerica (now Citigroup) having
power and perhaps maybe (just maybe) being right about a thing or two.
Paul Maffia
>Actually, Primerica owned about 25% of Travelers Insurance stock back in
>1993 or so, just after Traveler's de-mutilated. If you look through the
>headlines of all the newspapers, they say things like "Primerica bought the
>remaining stock in Travelers that it didn't already own." Further, the
>shareholders of Travelers had to approve the buyout price.
"De-mutilated"?
>Anyone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is obviously someone who
>derives great fear from a company like Primerica (now Citigroup) having
>power and perhaps maybe (just maybe) being right about a thing or two.
Utter nonsense. Someone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is simply
mistaken.
But someone who thinks that someone who is mistaken about history and from
that jumps to the moronic conclusion that somehow that means they are
afraid of a Company like Primerica having power, etc. merely proves, since
they are a Primerica Rep, that if they are representative of the abilities
of those reps in general, that no one has anything to fear from that
company at all.
--
Paul M.
USMCPFS
>- and my apologies to USMCPFS,>
No need at all to apologize although I appreciate your honesty. Sometimes folks
disagree as to the facts and other times disagree as a matter of opinion. In
newsgroups the lines often get blurred.
Thanks again.
USMCPFS
>associates never
make it to the exam and do not get a refund after 30 days has passed.>
The same can be said industrywide. In fact, where I live the prelicensing
course and exam fees are well above $199. Many folks industrywide either never
take the exam, fail the exam or pass the exam but wash out in less than 2
years. They receive no refunds either. The attrition rate in this industry is
staggering. Very few folks make it long term.
Brent D. Gardner
Excellent post!
Keep up the good work.
USMCPFS
<tidbits>
I understand the difference between a journalist and a regulator. I also
understand the difference between a warning and a multibillion dollar
settlement and/or a multimillion dollar fine. Many of us (like Brent) keep
files on such things. I have all those articles and many more. Both positive
and negative. You might check out our current relationship with the Armed
Forces. This obviously was very important to me as I was a former career Marine
Officer. Also check out A. M Best's comments in their latest press release
concerning us.
A.R.M.S. was an "insurance watch dog Company" ? Please, sir.
This company was far from perfect 20 years ago and still is not perfect today
but we are proud of our current standing with all regulatory agencies. They
appear to be quite satisfied with us. We have responded positively to any and
all regulatory directives. Many companies have not as evidenced by the well
documented settlements and fines. I will leave them nameless to protect those
good agents from those firms who did not participate in the shenanigans.
When you charge "criminal acts" I ask what were the results of the judicial
proceedings. Who was convicted or fined? How much?
tenthlevel
Paul McDonald wrote:
>
> Terry Burnett wrote in message
> <958309556.22613.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...
> >USMCPFS <usm...@aol.com> wrote
> >> Untrue. Primerica was the parent company prior to the acquistion of
> >Travelers
> >> at which time Primerica changed the corporate name to Travelers Group.
> >
> >I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. From all appearances, it was
> >Travelers that acquired Primerica. I'm quite sure that their billions of
> >assets (from selling cash value products) made 20-something-year-old
> >Primerica look quite small by comparison. The fact that Sandy Weill came
> >out on top is actually beside the point.
> >
>
> Actually, Primerica owned about 25% of Travelers Insurance stock back in
> 1993 or so, just after Traveler's de-mutilated. If you look through the
> headlines of all the newspapers, they say things like "Primerica bought the
> remaining stock in Travelers that it didn't already own." Further, the
> shareholders of Travelers had to approve the buyout price.
>
> Anyone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is obviously someone who
> derives great fear from a company like Primerica (now Citigroup) having
> power and perhaps maybe (just maybe) being right about a thing or two.
Primerica is now Citigroup? I don't think so.
USMCPFS
> Eventually, you will be able to make money from your
downline by selling them tickets to rah rah events and earn commissionon
Voicetel>
Untrue. You are only allowed to break even on events such as seminars. Report
all violators.
There are no commissions on VoiceTel. I have a ton of folks on it and use it
everyday. I've never received a cent in commissions. You could interview every
ex-RVP and above and never find ONE who would collaborate your claim. You are
probably confused for two reasons. (1) The Amway model. There is serious
controversy with their model concerning what has become known as "tool" money.
This is not allowed with us and this includes VoiceTel. (2) VoiceTel is
actually a business opportunity itself. However, their contract with us is with
the company not with RVP's. Read their website just to see how they sell their
product and compare it to what we pay. Our company negotiated a FLAT monthly
fee for our reps nationwide.
Terry Burnett
> Travelers sells evil whole life don't they? Aren't they then in direct
> competition with Primerica?
I've mentioned this exact thing several times in this group, but it usually
falls on deaf ears among PFS people. They simply refuse to acknowledge
this huge contradiction in marketing philosophies.
Most of them usually respond by distancing themselves from Travelers, and by
downplaying its significance in the life industry. Sorry, folks, but that
doesn't work.
TLB
Paul Maffia
>Right. I knew about that. I also understand that CitiGroup has two CEO's,
>Sandy Weill and the CitiCorp guy.
Well, yes and no. At the moment that is still true but Reed has announced
his resignation, effective sometime this summer, if I remember correctly.
He lost out to Sandy in an internal struggle. The Board backed Sandy and
Reed said bye bye.
--
Paul M.
Anthony F. Nelson
You people have your backs up in the most serious way. Reading these posts
is like lobbing a grenade into a crap factory -- shit everywhere!
The message is clear; if I'm going to be a Primerica agent, I need to tell
everyone I'm simply a male whore and then I can drop the insurance pitch in
after that. At that point they'll think I'm a step up from the former
profession . . .barely. Christ, how can anyone hold their head up and sell
for Primerica with this kind of anti-Primerica sentiment in the industry at
large? Are they going to keep changing names until the trail is so
convoluted that no one can remember an association?
Or perhaps, the traditional agents posting here are so scared of this firm
that they are spewing propaganda to keep me guessing . . .
Richard
Brent D. Gardner <gowil...@aol.comrenosux> wrote in message
news:20000505134911...@ng-da1.aol.com...
> >Steve,
> >you are not actually suggesting that most agents make it long term in
this
> >business, are you? As you and I both know (and have discussed many times)
the
> >atttrition rate within this industry is staggering.
>
> I learned something new last week at my annual partners conference with my
> broker/dealer. The people who "failed" in the insurance industry who then
went
> on to be securities brokers (and vice-versa), or to be fee based, or fee
only,
> financial planners and advisors, is rather large.
>
> In other words, the attrition rate isn't near what we think it is. Agents,
> registered reps, brokers, et al., tend to change positions, accept
promotions
> (to salaried jobs like wholesaling), or change course -- but remaining in
the
> financial services community. Surely the experience of selling life
insurance
> added to their skills that helped them get the job they have now.
>
> I'm not countering Semp's arguement -- just adding flavor. I still think
the
> attrition rate is too high, but last week I was surrounded by over a
hundred
> "failed" insurance agents who are now independent fee based financial
advisors
> -- many who make well in excess of six figures AFTER business expenses and
> income taxes. :-)
Terry Burnett
> Utter nonsense. Someone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is simply
> mistaken.
>
> But someone who thinks that someone who is mistaken about history and from
> that jumps to the moronic conclusion that somehow that means they are
> afraid of a Company like Primerica having power, etc. merely proves, since
> they are a Primerica Rep, that if they are representative of the abilities
> of those reps in general, that no one has anything to fear from that
> company at all.
Thanks, Paul. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Terry
Terry Burnett
> No need at all to apologize although I appreciate your honesty. Sometimes
folks
> disagree as to the facts and other times disagree as a matter of opinion.
In
> newsgroups the lines often get blurred.
Yeah, I try to stick to the facts as much as possible, and I can tell that
you do, too. Opinions tend to cloud the issues and close people's minds.
Just for the record, I see a great deal of merit in the BTID philosophy, BUT
.. . .
(1) Primerica has an long history of blatantly unethical marketing
practices, especially their gross distortion of cash value products. The
stuff that PFS agents are trained to tell prospects about UL and WL has very
little basis in fact, and the company knows it. Also, their habit of
replacing any cash value policy they run across is totally unscrupulous and
irresponsible.
(2) Primerica tends to treat their agents (old and new) like dirt. I came
very close to signing up with them in 1991, but after I skimmed through
their ridiculously large agent contract (45 pages, no less) which prevents
agents from seeking legal remedies, I politely told them to get lost.
(3) I have found that there are a lot of people on tight budgets who *want*
a cash value policy, in spite of my recommendations that they buy something
more affordable. Such people are amazing indeed, but I have no problem
selling them a cash value policy. The customer is the boss, and it's
foolish to force a term policy on somebody who doesn't want it.
Terry Burnett
tenthlevel
I had a brief 14 month stint with Crimerica. But I wasn't aware that
other firms charged licensing fees IN ADVANCE of the exam and then paid
the license fees for you at some point down the road maybe. Don't most
agents pay the fee when they write the exam, and pay it to the
licensing body, not the company they are contracted to? Why should
anyone pay Primerica in advance for licensing fees and let Primerica
earn interest on that money while he studies for the exam? It seems
like a simple cash grab on the part of Primerica to me.
Steve
tenthlevel
USMCPFS wrote:
>
> Tenth:
>
> <tidbits>
>
> I understand the difference between a journalist and a regulator. I also
> understand the difference between a warning and a multibillion dollar
> settlement and/or a multimillion dollar fine. Many of us (like Brent) keep
> files on such things. I have all those articles and many more. Both positive
>
> and negative. You might check out our current relationship with the Armed
> Forces.
And who would I check that out with?
This obviously was very important to me as I was a former career Marine
> Officer. Also check out A. M Best's comments in their latest press release
> concerning us.
>
> A.R.M.S. was an "insurance watch dog Company" ? Please, sir.
If ARMS isn't an insurance watchdog comapny, then I guess you can't
rely on journalism for accuracy. Surprise.
>
> This company was far from perfect 20 years ago and still is not perfect today
> but we are proud of our current standing with all regulatory agencies. They
> appear to be quite satisfied with us. We have responded positively to any and
> all regulatory directives.
You sound like you are speaking for the company. To my knowledge, you
are in breach of your contract in doing so. There is a wide difference
between the company and its agents, who are their own companies. The
company itself does try to keep its nose clean. But the agents are
still underqualified and the vast majority of the ones I met, and I met
many, were simply MLM hypesters with nothing more than a few simple
licenses.
Many companies have not as evidenced by the well
> documented settlements and fines. I will leave them nameless to protect those
> good agents from those firms who did not participate in the shenanigans.
My theory is that PFS has cleverly managed to reduce the effects of bad
publicity through the use of its contract with the agents. The company
doesn't get sued, the indicidual agents do. But they don't because its
their friends and family they are doing business with. I had a good
case of misrepresentation against the "friend" who recruited me using
the exaggerated income claims that PFAs are taught to use by their
uplines. Why did I not pursue it? Because I would have had to sue my
friend as well as the company, and most likely the company would not
have been found responsible. Its a typical MLM strategy which protects
the company while putting great stress on personal relationships.
>
> When you charge "criminal acts" I ask what were the results of the judicial
> proceedings. Who was convicted or fined? How much?
Did I charge criminal acts? I didn't think so. I might have, but I
tend to be careful about inflammatory language such as that since
Primerica is quite liberal in its use of the judicial system to head off
criticism. I will say that the behaviour of my upline was certainly
deceptive and misreprentative. I found deception and misrepresentation
to be firmly rooted in all my training.
Paul McDonald
Lines: 169
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Message-ID: <KjoV4.173$mD6...@nntp0.chicago.il.ameritech.net>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 23:13:50 -0500
Organization: Ameritech.Net www.ameritech.net Complaints: ab...@ameritech.net
Approved: insu...@toast.org
1986? About Art Williams? You've got to be kidding... That was so long
ago that the Chicago Bears were a good team.
Figure it out: Art Williams left in 1991--that's nine big years ago. In
1991, Phil Jackson was the coach of the Chicago Bulls and they were a great
team. Now they are Clippers competition. The opposite can also be true
over a nine year period.
Okay, then... how about 1993 when Consumer Reports called Primerica the
"King of Term" and said "you won't go far wrong writh a Primerica policy"
Later that year Consumer Reports released a book on buying all kinds of
insurance (life, p&c, etc). There were two (and only two) life insurance
companies recommended by that book: USAA and Primerica. Sounds like they
changed their tune.
And in 1997 Best's review when Primerica was called a "role model for its
lawsuit-weary rivals"
Those are two off the top of my head. Got anything current?
tenthlevel wrote in message
<958732210.11238.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...
tenthlevel
Just to clarify for you and whoever else reads my post: I am no longer
in insurance. My 14 months in primerica was enough to convince me that
I didn't want to be part of the industry in any respect. The reason I
post my opinions on Primerica is that since being a part of their game,
I am become adamantly anti-MLM.
Primerica is ripe with MLMers who bounce from one get-rich-quick scheme
to another, bringing with them Amway tactics and other MLM approaches
that to me are distasteful and exploitive if not abusive, even when soap
is what is being sold.
When you put people with this MLM mentality into a field like insurance
and investments, it just gets downright ugly and dangerous for people
who get involved, moreso for the recruits than the clients. Lets face
it, term is term, whole life is whole life, products are just
products. But these guys are taught to recruit and sell deceptively,
and that is my major complaint. A good number of the people phoning
their friends on behalf of the company have no idea what they are
getting themselves into, what they are asking their friends to buy or
join, or even who they are in business with. They are given a totally
white-washed impression of the company and gross exaggerations of income
potential.
In addition to that is the fact that PFAs are manipulated to exploit
their relationships on behalf of the upline and the company, and 99
times out of 100, it is the company that benefits the most from the
exploitation of relationships. MLM and financial services is a bad idea
for everyone except the company and its CEOs and other key players. I
am only slightly more friendly to non-MLM insurance salesman than I am
to Primerica reps. I think the insurance industry is full of problems
no matter what angle you look at it from. But when I need insurance,
investments, or other financial services, I'll choose someone with a
university degree and a track record of personal integrity, someone who
is not simply motivated by a lot of hype and BS to sell products. I
will never, however, deal with anyone from Primerica or any other MLM,
and as a result of my experience and inside view of the company, I'll
be recommending to others that they DO NOT go near Primerica for these
services. Its not worth the hassle of being recruited through false
flattery and exaggerated and deceptive claims, or sold expensive term
because whole-life is a rip-off, as THEY say.
My dad turned 65 this year. He WISHES he kept his whole life insurance.
Go figure.
"Brent D. Gardner" wrote:
>
> Tenthlevel,
>
> Excellent post!
>
> Keep up the good work.
>
USMCPFS
> Are they going to keep changing names until the trail is so
convoluted that no one can remember an association?>
There has been one name change in 23 years and it was 10 years ago.
SCat999999
>his resignation, effective sometime this summer, if I remember correctly.
I also read somewhere, I believe it was either "Investment News" or the WSJ not
too long ago that Weill was planning on leaving some time next year as well.
Steve, LUTCF
Robert C. Thomas
<nTkV4.73812$fV.45...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
>
> Or perhaps, the traditional agents posting here are so scared of this
firm
> that they are spewing propaganda to keep me guessing . . .
>
Primerica clients. I never met a Primerica client I couldn't sell.
;>)
bob
Paul McDonald
Paul Maffia wrote in message <8g3q7g$pht$1...@eskinews.eskimo.com>...
>"Paul McDonald" <paul_m...@ameritech.net> writes:
>
>>Actually, Primerica owned about 25% of Travelers Insurance stock back in
>>1993 or so, just after Traveler's de-mutilated. If you look through the
>>headlines of all the newspapers, they say things like "Primerica bought
the
>>remaining stock in Travelers that it didn't already own." Further, the
>>shareholders of Travelers had to approve the buyout price.
>
woops... spell-checker... should have been "de-mutualized"
>
>>Anyone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is obviously someone who
>>derives great fear from a company like Primerica (now Citigroup) having
>>power and perhaps maybe (just maybe) being right about a thing or two.
>
>Utter nonsense. Someone who thinks Travelers bought Primerica is simply
>mistaken.
The argument earlier made on the board was that Travelers bought Primerica.
I'm glad you agree with me on this.
>
>But someone who thinks that someone who is mistaken about history and from
>that jumps to the moronic conclusion that somehow that means they are
>afraid of a Company like Primerica having power, etc. merely proves, since
>they are a Primerica Rep, that if they are representative of the abilities
>of those reps in general, that no one has anything to fear from that
>company at all.
>
That's right. You have nothing to fear from me. You have nothing to fear
from people like me. Don't change. Please.
Keep selling cash value insurance and creating a market for me to go replace
it. It's a heckuva lot easier to sell term insurance and investments if I'm
replacing a cash value policy. If they don't own any insurance at all, then
I actually have to make a sale and close them on the need for insurance and
investments.
LILLIE
Primerica has earned it's own reputation so if the shoe
fits. Facts are facts, good honest agents are just plain
tired of the shit sold to unsuspecting people who know
nothing about insurance except what their agents tell them.
Primercia has created it's own bad name.
Respectfully,
Lillie
In article <nTkV4.73812$fV.4580512@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Anthony F. Nelson"
<ingre...@att.net> wrote:
> Unbelievable!
> You people have your backs up in the most serious way.
> Reading these posts
> is like lobbing a grenade into a crap factory -- shit
> everywhere!
> The message is clear; if I'm going to be a Primerica
> agent, I need to tell
> everyone I'm simply a male whore and then I can drop
> the insurance pitch in
> after that. At that point they'll think I'm a step up
> from the former
> profession . . .barely. Christ, how can anyone hold
> their head up and sell
> for Primerica with this kind of anti-Primerica
> sentiment in the industry at
> large? Are they going to keep changing names until
> the trail is so
> convoluted that no one can remember an association?
> Or perhaps, the traditional agents posting here are so
> scared of this firm
> that they are spewing propaganda to keep me guessing .
> . .
> > Brent D. Gardner
> > http://www.gardnerfinancialgroup.com/
> > Money is flat and meant to be piled high-Scottish
> Proverb
> >
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Brent D. Gardner
>"De-mutilated"?
I think this was an attempt at humor. At least, I thought it was funny. <G>
Brent D. Gardner
>You people have your backs up in the most serious way. Reading these posts
>is like lobbing a grenade into a crap factory -- shit everywhere!
Now that's funny. LMAO
The vision you conjure up...Agents throwing grenades into home offices (aka
"crap" factories, at least, sometimes) and then running like hell...you've got
me in stitches!
>The message is clear; if I'm going to be a Primerica agent, I need to tell
>everyone I'm simply a male whore and then I can drop the insurance pitch in
>after that.
Anytime one competes soley on price (as Primerica does...comparing overpriced
term to permanent), the a whore is as a whore does.
>At that point they'll think I'm a step up from the former
>profession . . .barely.
I disagree. While the public tends to not like insurance agents in general,
overwhelmingly they like "their" agent (over 90% of the time).
>Christ, how can anyone hold their head up and sell
>for Primerica with this kind of anti-Primerica sentiment in the industry at
>large?
I've been scratching my head and asking the same question for my entire career.
>Are they going to keep changing names until the trail is so
>convoluted that no one can remember an association?
Again, I ask the same question. <g>
>Or perhaps, the traditional agents posting here are so scared of this firm
>that they are spewing propaganda to keep me guessing . . .
I wouldn't call it scared. Concerned, about the tarnished image the neophyte
part timers continue to smudge with their post crap factory bombing fingers,
definitely.
Terry Burnett
news:20000522121335...@ng-fm1.aol.com...
> Anthony:
>
> > Are they going to keep changing names until the trail is so
> convoluted that no one can remember an association?>
>
True, except that MILICO and the A. L. Williams marketing organization were
actually two different names that "changed" into Primerica. :)
TLB
Paul Maffia
>That's right. You have nothing to fear from me. You have nothing to fear
>from people like me. Don't change. Please.
I won't, for the simple reason that you don't compete with me, you can't,
both because we do different things and because you don't have the
requisite knowledge, even if we lived in the same area.
>Keep selling cash value insurance and creating a market for me to go replace
>it. It's a heckuva lot easier to sell term insurance and investments if I'm
>replacing a cash value policy. If they don't own any insurance at all, then
>I actually have to make a sale and close them on the need for insurance and
>investments.
Duh! I have never sold a insurance policy of any kind, in the past, do not
currently and will never do so in the future.
My clients buy extremely low load life insurance (cash value or term),
lower cost than yours, if they need it and is appropriate for them and
their needs; and true no-load mutual, low expense ratio funds with far
better history and prospects than anything you sell.
But they don't buy either from me.
--
Paul M.
SCat999999
>it. It's a heckuva lot easier to sell term insurance and investments if I'm
>replacing a cash value policy. If they don't own any insurance at all, then
>I actually have to make a sale and close them on the need for insurance and
>investments.
>
Ah...another insurance PROFESSIONAL heard from. Yeah right.
Steve,LUTCF
Brent D. Gardner
>There has been one name change in 23 years and it was 10 years ago.
I think I see what Anthony is getting at.
MILICO
A.L. Williams
Primerica
Travelers
CitiGroup
PFS agents are afraid of admitting who they are, or what they do for a living
when they call. They drop names of companies they do not represent nor do they
work for, in order to malinger people into meeting with them about a
"management opportunity." Throughout my career, I have documented their
approaches to myself, my family, my staff and my clients. It has NOT changed.
They still use words like "trash value" and use twisting tactics such as lying
to policyholders about "borrowing your own money" and "the company keeps your
cash value when you die."
As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting, failure to
notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice unethically (often
unlicensed, and without E&O), then I will continue to post this fact
periodically so that anyone who wants to know the truth will have access.
Brent D. Gardner
>Just for the record, I see a great deal of merit in the BTID philosophy, BUT
>.. . .
>
>(1) Primerica has an long history of blatantly unethical marketing
>practices, especially their gross distortion of cash value products. The
>stuff that PFS agents are trained to tell prospects about UL and WL has very
>little basis in fact, and the company knows it. Also, their habit of
>replacing any cash value policy they run across is totally unscrupulous and
>irresponsible.
>
>(2) Primerica tends to treat their agents (old and new) like dirt. I came
>very close to signing up with them in 1991, but after I skimmed through
>their ridiculously large agent contract (45 pages, no less) which prevents
>agents from seeking legal remedies, I politely told them to get lost.
>
>(3) I have found that there are a lot of people on tight budgets who *want*
>a cash value policy, in spite of my recommendations that they buy something
>more affordable. Such people are amazing indeed, but I have no problem
>selling them a cash value policy. The customer is the boss, and it's
>foolish to force a term policy on somebody who doesn't want it.
Excellent post!
Paul Maffia
>Paul,
>>"De-mutilated"?
>I think this was an attempt at humor. At least, I thought it was funny. <G>
I don't think it was an attempt at humor and he confirmed that. I also
agree it was funny. But don't you agree it is on a par with so many of
those particular reps that appear in these newsgroups?
--
Paul M.
USMCPFS
>He WISHES he kept his whole life insurance.>
Why didn't he?
My father wishes he saved more money. How about yours?
tenthlevel
Anthony F. Nelson
Don't hold back y'all!
Well, to keep the story/experiment moving along I went and ponied up for my
State Insurance (Health, Life & HMO) Licensing examination: $80.00. A post
in this thread had a 100% correct take on this element: Prospect pays
Primerica up front $199.00 and then Primerica pays back the part of the
upfront money as reimbursement for the examination fee; anyone want to take
a guess at the model this represents most closely? Whole-life! Now is THAT
the most ironic thing you ever heard in your whole life. Pun intended.
Anthony
LILLIE <LILLIEN...@CSONLINE.NET.invalid> wrote in message
news:0671ec78...@usw-ex0110-076.remarq.com...
> Dear Anthony,
> Primerica has earned it's own reputation so if the shoe
> fits. Facts are facts, good honest agents are just plain
> tired of the shit sold to unsuspecting people who know
> nothing about insurance except what their agents tell them.
> Primercia has created it's own bad name.
>
> Respectfully,
> Lillie
>
>
>
>
> In article <nTkV4.73812$fV.4580512@bgtnsc05-
> news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Anthony F. Nelson"
> <ingre...@att.net> wrote:
> > Unbelievable!
> > You people have your backs up in the most serious way.
> > Reading these posts
> > is like lobbing a grenade into a crap factory -- shit
> > everywhere!
> > The message is clear; if I'm going to be a Primerica
> > agent, I need to tell
> > everyone I'm simply a male whore and then I can drop
> > the insurance pitch in
> > after that. At that point they'll think I'm a step up
> > from the former
> > profession . . .barely. Christ, how can anyone hold
> > their head up and sell
> > for Primerica with this kind of anti-Primerica
> > sentiment in the industry at
> > large? Are they going to keep changing names until
> > the trail is so
> > convoluted that no one can remember an association?
> > Or perhaps, the traditional agents posting here are so
> > scared of this firm
> > that they are spewing propaganda to keep me guessing .
> > . .
> > > Brent D. Gardner
> > > http://www.gardnerfinancialgroup.com/
> > > Money is flat and meant to be piled high-Scottish
> > Proverb
> > >
>
>
>
USMCPFS
You are so much smarter than this.
>MILICO
>A.L. Williams
>Primerica
>Travelers
>CitiGroup
Our company has never been called anything other than ALW or PFS. It did not
change from MILICO to ALW. ALW sold MILICO policies. The parent name has had
several name changes as a result of a series of mega-mergers.
>They drop names of companies they do not represent>
Specifically, which companies do we not represent? Citibank? Travelers L&A?
Soloman Smith Barney? CitiFinancial? Which one? I'm appointed and represent
products for all of them.
>As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting, failure to
notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice unethically>
But of course you cannot produce a shred of documented evidence that any of
this is happening on a widespread basis. We all know what Best's Review said in
their analysis of our compliance program.
Paul McDonald
Brent D. Gardner wrote in message
<20000525161006...@ng-fy1.aol.com>...
>Semp,
>
>>There has been one name change in 23 years and it was 10 years ago.
>
>I think I see what Anthony is getting at.
>
>A.L. Williams
>Primerica
>Travelers
>CitiGroup
>
living
>when they call. They drop names of companies they do not represent nor do
they
>work for, in order to malinger people into meeting with them about a
>"management opportunity." Throughout my career, I have documented their
>approaches to myself, my family, my staff and my clients. It has NOT
changed.
I'd like to see that documentation. Hey this is a newsgroup, post it!
Yeah, some of it (maybe even a lot of it) is as you say.
>
>They still use words like "trash value" and use twisting tactics such as
lying
>to policyholders about "borrowing your own money" and "the company keeps
your
>cash value when you die."
How is "borrowing your own money" a lie? ... The agent says that you can
build up a cash value that you can borrow against. Read your policy.
How is "the company keeps your cash value when you die" a lie? In most
cases, that is exactly what happens. Read your policy.
>
>As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting, failure
to
>notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice unethically
(often
>unlicensed, and without E&O), then I will continue to post this fact
>periodically so that anyone who wants to know the truth will have access.
hmmm... if any of these accusations were true, I'd suggest you contact your
state insurance commissioner's office and put the agent doing that out of
business. It would be a lot more effective than crying wolf on a newsgroup.
And, as I understand it, the agents have been carrying E&O for years.
Terry Burnett
> Ah...another insurance PROFESSIONAL heard from. Yeah right.
>
> Steve,LUTCF
Yeah, that says it all. What further evidence do we need of their
questionable scruples?
Terry
USMCPFS
>True, except that MILICO and the A. L. Williams marketing organization were
actually two different names that "changed" into Primerica. :)>
What on earth is your point? ALW was changed to PFS. MILICO was changed to
Primerica Life. It's been that way for a decade. Anthony had implied they had
continually changed their name. I pointed out how inaccurate that claim was.
Brent D. Gardner
>But don't you agree it is on a par with so many of
>those particular reps that appear in these newsgroups?
Yep. :-)
Terry Burnett
> Excellent post!
Thanks, Brent. Several of yours have been excellent also.
Terry
USMCPFS
>Ah...another insurance PROFESSIONAL heard from.>
I was wondering if there are ANY professionals over here at all. I see very
little professional discourse and an almost disdain for verifiable facts.
Stephen
you represent the products or the company. You have permission to sell
the products, like a convenience store owner sells cigarettes. Read
your contract more carefully.
USMCPFS wrote:
>
> Brent:
>
> You are so much smarter than this.
>
> >MILICO
> >A.L. Williams
> >Primerica
> >Travelers
> >CitiGroup
>
> Our company has never been called anything other than ALW or PFS. It did not
> change from MILICO to ALW. ALW sold MILICO policies. The parent name has had
> several name changes as a result of a series of mega-mergers.
>
> >They drop names of companies they do not represent>
>
> Specifically, which companies do we not represent? Citibank? Travelers L&A?
> Soloman Smith Barney? CitiFinancial? Which one? I'm appointed and represent
> products for all of them.
>
> >As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting, failure to
> notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice unethically>
>
Stephen
Exposition of A.L. Williams: Cult or Crusade?" Bet you $1,000,000 your
RVP never showed you that little gem.
Paul McDonald wrote:
>
> Brent D. Gardner wrote in message
> <20000525161006...@ng-fy1.aol.com>...
> >Semp,
> >
> >>There has been one name change in 23 years and it was 10 years ago.
> >
> >I think I see what Anthony is getting at.
> >
> >MILICO
> >A.L. Williams
> >Primerica
> >Travelers
> >CitiGroup
> >
> >PFS agents are afraid of admitting who they are, or what they do for a
> living
> >when they call. They drop names of companies they do not represent nor do
> they
> >work for, in order to malinger people into meeting with them about a
> >"management opportunity." Throughout my career, I have documented their
> >approaches to myself, my family, my staff and my clients. It has NOT
> changed.
>
> I'd like to see that documentation. Hey this is a newsgroup, post it!
> Yeah, some of it (maybe even a lot of it) is as you say.
>
> >
> >They still use words like "trash value" and use twisting tactics such as
> lying
> >to policyholders about "borrowing your own money" and "the company keeps
> your
> >cash value when you die."
>
> How is "borrowing your own money" a lie? ... The agent says that you can
> build up a cash value that you can borrow against. Read your policy.
>
> How is "the company keeps your cash value when you die" a lie? In most
> cases, that is exactly what happens. Read your policy.
>
> >
> >As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting, failure
> to
> >notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice unethically
> (often
> >unlicensed, and without E&O), then I will continue to post this fact
> >periodically so that anyone who wants to know the truth will have access.
>
> hmmm... if any of these accusations were true, I'd suggest you contact your
> state insurance commissioner's office and put the agent doing that out of
> business. It would be a lot more effective than crying wolf on a newsgroup.
>
> And, as I understand it, the agents have been carrying E&O for years.
>
> >
> >
Stephen
the right thing is continually doing the wrong thing to its agents. At
last a whole life policy pays interest. PFS doesnt on the $199. At
least the whole life piolicy gives you either a death benefit or the
cash values. PFS keeps your $199 after a short period of time,
regardless of whether you get your license. And then there's expensive
seminar trips that give you nothing for your money you didnt already get
a kazillion times in the office. I guress if you repeat the same BS
often enough, and charge enough money for people to here it, there
going to say "I guess I better buy this: I spent enough on it."
Brainwashing, manipulative, cult-like sales jerks. they could easily
shave their heads and sell candles on main street.
> > > > Brent D. Gardner
> > > > http://www.gardnerfinancialgroup.com/
> > > > Money is flat and meant to be piled high-Scottish
> > > Proverb
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
Paul Maffia
>>
>>They still use words like "trash value" and use twisting tactics such as
>lying
>>to policyholders about "borrowing your own money" and "the company keeps
>your
>>cash value when you die."
>How is "borrowing your own money" a lie? ... The agent says that you can
>build up a cash value that you can borrow against. Read your policy.
It is a lie because you are not borrowing your own money. You are
borrowing the insurance company's. You are using the cash value in the
policy as collateral for the loan, just as you would IF YOU WENT TO A
BANK AND BORROWED MONEY FROM THEM USING THE POLICY AS COLLATERAL.
>How is "the company keeps your cash value when you die" a lie? In most
>cases, that is exactly what happens. Read your policy.
Nonsense. You should read the policy. The guaranteed cash value of a
policy is nothing more than the reserves THE LAW REQUIRES AN INSURANCE
COMPANY TO ESTABLISH TO GUARANTEE THE PAYMENT OF FUTURE CLAIMS, which, in
a cash value policy, the policy holder has a contingent right to. In a
term policy, the policy holder has only one contingency under which that
sum will be paid, death.
But there are policies (all participating policies, Universal life
policies with Option B selected and all variable policies) where there are
other cash values accumulated which IN ALL CASES WILL BE PAID IN ADDITION
TO THE GUARANTEED CASH VALUE and in the event of death PAID IN ADDITION TO
THE FACE VALUE OF THE POLICY.
--
Paul M.
Stephen
themselves as any of those names Anthony mentioned. And they do.
Because the company has no credibility in the market.
gkir...@my-deja.com
Hey, USMCPFS -
I used to quote the same Best's Review article when I was looking for
yet another way to justify my involvement in PFS.
You're right - PFS has a fantastic compliance department - however,
that applies to the corporate side of what they do. Basically, they try
to keep tight control over their agents in the field, and have
introduced a lot of initiatives to look good in the eyes of the
regulators.
HOwever, speaking from the perspective of a former agent in the FIELD,
the reality is that no matter what corporate PFS preaches, a lot of it
is NOT getting implemented.
Communism was a good idea in theory, but it didn't work in practice.
Reminds me a lot of PFS compliance.
BTW: Why do you always have to quote that one article? I guess AM Best
is the be-all end-all when it comes to information??
George
In article <20000526112718...@ng-fm1.aol.com>,
usm...@aol.com (USMCPFS) wrote:
> Brent:
>
> You are so much smarter than this.
>
> >MILICO
> >A.L. Williams
> >Primerica
> >Travelers
> >CitiGroup
>
> Our company has never been called anything other than ALW or PFS. It
did not
> change from MILICO to ALW. ALW sold MILICO policies. The parent name
has had
> several name changes as a result of a series of mega-mergers.
>
> >They drop names of companies they do not represent>
>
> Specifically, which companies do we not represent? Citibank?
Travelers L&A?
> Soloman Smith Barney? CitiFinancial? Which one? I'm appointed and
represent
> products for all of them.
>
> >As long as they continue to break the law (malingering, twisting,
failure to
> notify regulatory authorities when replacing), and practice
unethically>
>
> But of course you cannot produce a shred of documented evidence that
any of
> this is happening on a widespread basis. We all know what Best's
Review said in
> their analysis of our compliance program.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
USMCPFS
> PFS has a fantastic compliance department ->
<and have
introduced a lot of initiatives to look good in the eyes of the
regulators.>>>>>>
Thanks. And they have succeeded.
> former agent in the FIELD,
>the reality is that no matter what corporate PFS preaches, a lot of it
>is NOT getting implemented.>>>>>>
You can only speak for your actions and those of your trainer. If YOU didn't
follow the compliance initiatives....that's your fault.
<<Why do you always have to quote that one article?>>>>>>>
Just in the past week....in this newsgroup....Best was put forth as an example
of what's wrong with us when someone referenced some 1980's material. I have
found that Best does carry credibility with many professional agents. It is
only natural (and common sense) to use that article which rather exhaustively
looked at our compliance program and made many strong, favorable comments. I
have a better question for you. What public( verifiable) source can you provide
that would demonstrate any claims that we are currently operating in a
non-compliant fashion?
USMCPFS
In another message you attempted to correct my numbers concerning someones
claim of only 2000 reps earning 40K annually. I suggested that number was
actually "more than double". Your research showed approximately 4,000 reps as
of last summer but only included those earning at least 50K. So my statement
was 100% accurate.
Pardon my directness but your message on "financial independence" appears
amateurish. It lacks critical analysis. For example, what percentage of the
folks who don't earn 50K are parttime? What percentage of parttimers anywhere
earn 50K? Would a parttime 24K perhaps enable a spouse to stay home with the
kids? Would a parttime 18K perhaps allow a family to more easily meet their
monthly obligations? Would a parttime 12K possibly help pay down or eliminate
their debt balance? Would a parttime 10k invested properly for the long term
help build security over a 30 year horizon? Would a parttime 300/mo make
someones car payment? Would a parttime 200/mo pay off a student loan? You see,
I personally have 3 parttime reps who earn less than 50K but all have
investment accounts with me well into 6 figures.Will they not be financially
independent? The bottom line is that your superficial analysis leaves out the
rest of the story. Now, having said this, I will readily admit that there are
also many who simply cannot make money. Sales, particularly financial sales, is
a tough business to succeed in. This industry has an alarming attrition rate.
The very reason that this field can be so lucrative is that it is so difficult.
Many try-few succeed.
Anthony F. Nelson
evening for all the world to see. I'm sooooo nervous.
Anthony
P.S. They told us at PFS High: "All you need to do is pass the test."
Implied that 'just good enough' is 'good enough' for the PFS teacher. So,
I'll slam a couple beers and let my fingers go to work picking the bare
minimum to pass; then I'll go out into the world at large as speak like the
professionally trained superstar I know I'll be . . .
:)
Anthony F. Nelson <ingre...@att.net> wrote in message
news:VOxX4.5594$793.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Anthony F. Nelson
just a matter of time as the clock begins to twist, uh, excuse me, tick . .
..
Anthony F. Nelson <ingre...@att.net> wrote in message
news:ztGZ4.10787$Zm5.7...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
USMCPFS
>I'll slam a couple beers and let my fingers go to work picking the bare
>minimum to pass; then I'll go out into the world at large as speak like the
>professionally trained superstar I know I'll be . . .>>>
Is this an example of a professional?
gkir...@my-deja.com
> > former agent in the FIELD,
> >the reality is that no matter what corporate PFS preaches, a lot of
it
> >is NOT getting implemented.>>>>>>
>
> You can only speak for your actions and those of your trainer. If YOU
didn't
> follow the compliance initiatives....that's your fault.
worked with over 40 agents in my office, and saw what they were doing
as well. I also had the opportunity to work in OTHER PFS offices, and
the same thing was going on.
I really hope you wake up out of your PFS-induced day-dream someday and
realize that just because at the corporate level a company makes
initiatives, it doesn't mean that they are being done at the field
level.
George
Stephen
"Anthony F. Nelson" wrote:
> Wish me luck; I swear I will post my grade in honest fashion on Friday
> evening for all the world to see. I'm sooooo nervous.
>
dont sweat it. a well trained ape could pass that exam.
>
> Anthony
>
> P.S. They told us at PFS High:
now thats accurate, PFS is high school equivalency to insurance and investment
education. .
> "All you need to do is pass the test."
> Implied that 'just good enough' is 'good enough' for the PFS teacher.
they'll take anybody: they dont need the best.
> So,
> I'll slam a couple beers and let my fingers go to work picking the bare
> minimum to pass; then I'll go out into the world at large as speak like the
> professionally trained superstar I know I'll be . . .
>
> :)
>
good luck on getting a 65. and good luck getting a client. make sure you get
one you dont like too much.
Stephen
USMCPFS wrote:
> Stephen:
>
> In another message you attempted to correct my numbers concerning someones
> claim of only 2000 reps earning 40K annually. I suggested that number was
> actually "more than double". Your research showed approximately 4,000 reps as
> of last summer but only included those earning at least 50K. So my statement
> was 100% accurate.
>
the numbers i posted were PFS's numbers from their website. I'm not interested in
a pissing match to prove who is right or wrong. the numbers are the numbers. do
with them what you will. .
>
> Pardon my directness but your message on "financial independence" appears
> amateurish. It lacks critical analysis. For example, what percentage of the
> folks who don't earn 50K are parttime?
0% in Canada, where I was an agent. Nontheless, everyone who joins is encouraged
to become full-time in the business, to give up their J.O.B. and is made to feel
"less than" if they don't quit their jobs. a big part t of the pitch is financial
freedom, which more than 98% of the existing sales force has yet to achieve.
another big part of the pitch is reduce spending, increase income, and therefore
enjoy a better quality of life. but PFS never divulges to the public the number of
agents who in the process of using PFS's system to improve tgheir quality of life,
went broke doing it.
> What percentage of parttimers anywhere
> earn 50K?
who cares? we are not talking about them. don't try to deflect this into some
other arena.
> Would a parttime 24K perhaps enable a spouse to stay home with the
> kids?
what percentage of PFS reps make that? and how are you going to back it up? few
if any part time reps make that kind of money partime. you think asking
suggestive rhetorical open-ended questions is going to work here? its not. it
only works on those who haven't been exposed to this deceptive sales trick.
> Would a parttime 18K perhaps allow a family to more easily meet their
> monthly obligations? Would a parttime 12K possibly help pay down or eliminate
> their debt balance? Would a parttime 10k invested properly for the long term
> help build security over a 30 year horizon? Would a parttime 300/mo make
> someones car payment? Would a parttime 200/mo pay off a student loan?
answer your own stupid questions yourself, and then give me some facts. howe many
partimers in PFS are making
24k
18k
12k
10k
300 mnth
200 month
have invested for 30 years with pfs
your rhetorical nonsense is just nonsense. give me facts and don't give me junk.
this stuff means diddly and only works on gullible clients who think when you ask
these questions you are implying they are a reality in PFS. they are far from the
reality.
> You see,
> I personally have 3 parttime reps who earn less than 50K
how much less? are they 1k? 2K? 3k? You accuse me of inaccuracy but you give me
nothing of substance, just MLM logic and deception. the above statement means
nothing.
> but all have
> investment accounts with me well into 6 figures.
and i'm sure they wouldnt mind you posting their statements for me to view right?
no? they would mind? then find another argument you can back up, because at this
point, i would just say bunk.
> Will they not be financially
> independent?
cut it out.
> The bottom line is that your superficial analysis leaves out the
> rest of the story.
if i'm superficial in my analysis, then yours is not even in the ballpark of
reality. get some real training and knock it off with this crap. it doesnt fly.
i'd have thrown you out of my house by now if you came to me spewing this nonsense.
> Now, having said this, I will readily admit that there are
> also many who simply cannot make money. Sales, particularly financial sales, is
> a tough business to succeed in.
then tell your associate recruiters to use a little discretion when recruiting
instead of the three-foot rule: recruit it if breathing and within three feet of
you.
> This industry has an alarming attrition rate.
how does pfs's attrition rate compare? i would wager its 4 or 5 times the other
company's and unless you have reliable independent data to back up any claims you
make on attrition, i'm not listening.
>
> The very reason that this field can be so lucrative is that it is so difficult.
> Many try-few succeed.
too bad you guys dont tell people that going in, only after you need an excuse to
excuse the company and yourself. what a waste of time this thread is.
USMCPFS
>hat just because at the corporate level a company makes
initiatives, it doesn't mean that they are being done at the field level.>>>
Where specifically in the public record will I find documentation that we are
non-compliant on any widespread, companywide basis? Specifically.
USMCPFS
> the numbers are the numbers.>
Agreed. That they collaborated my post is beside the point.
>0% in Canada,>
Did you post Canada's numbers or company numbers?
> everyone who joins is encouraged
to become full-time in the business, to give up their J.O.B. and is made to
feel
"less than" if they don't quit their jobs.>>>
Untrue. We have many parttimers who have been around for many years. Why would
they stay if they felt uncomfortable? Why wouldn't they at least try fulltime
if they felt so pressured? Besides how would you know? You're from Canada. How
can you back up these assertions with facts?
> which more than 98% of the existing sales force has yet to achieve.>
How do you know how many have not or will not achieved financial freedom? I
have PT reps with 6 figure investment accounts. What is their status in your
eyes?
>to improve tgheir quality of life,
>went broke doing it.>>>>
You tell us. And tell us where we can find that documentation.
>who cares? we are not talking about them. don't try to deflect this into
>someother arena.>>>
Who cares? I do. You stated that 98% of the sales force does not earn 50K. I
asked what percentage of them are PT. If most are PT then whether or not they
are making 50K takes on a whole new meaning with critical analysis. Why dodge
my question?
<<<Re: 24K>>
>what percentage of PFS reps make that? and how are you going to back it
up?>>>
Good point. However, you inference that all 98.1% not making 50k are
unsuccessful allows that if even a small % make 24K your thesis is flawed.
<<few if any part time reps make that kind of money partime>>>
As you say....back that up.
> you think asking
suggestive rhetorical open-ended questions is going to work here?>
My questions were not rhetorical. I wanted answers not a dance routine.
>answer your own stupid questions yourself>
Telling.
>your rhetorical nonsense is just nonsense. give me facts and don't give me
junk.>>
I personally know partimers at every level I suggested making that level of
income. So I'll rephrase my question. If only one of each is in the entire
company would they too be failures as you have suggested in the past? Or has
their PT income been instrumental in achieving their goals? Also, asking
hypothetically (rather than rhetorically) should anyone in the future achieve
ever achieve say 10K a year PT MIGHT that help them financially?
>they are far from the reality>
Have you know shame? Let's break it down to the lowest level I suggested. Do
you really suggest "few if any" make $200 - $300 a month? Again as you fairly
ask of others....back it up.
>how much less? are they 1k? 2K? 3k? You accuse me of inaccuracy but you give
me nothing of substance,>>>
I gave you your own criteria!!! You suggested that all 98% not earning 50K were
somehow failures. I asked if 3 of my PT'ers making less than 50K who each had 6
figure invesment accounts were to be included in the less than 50K failure
group? Your answer is practically juvenile. Does it help your argument that
they are failures if I say they make 10K instead of 25K? The point is they make
less than 50K (your criteria) and are not failures (or broke).
> they would mind?>>
I'm sure they would mind. Can't we have any level of professional discourse?
> then find another argument you can back up,>>
Just say you won't answer the question. I don't dance.
<>cut it out.>
Is this where I say: No you cut it out.
>unless you have reliable independent data to back up any claims you
>make on attrition, i'm not listening.>>
Critical analysis begs for evenhandedness on both sides of an issue. I only
know that this industry has an alarming attrition rate and most professionals
will agree with me. We are no different. Most don't make it. See Larry's post
of a few days ago. 3 out of 20 hired since '97 are still in his office. The
numbers are alarming. I'm professional enough to admit that a company hiring PT
will have a higher rate than those not. It stands to reason. But I'd like to
see your reliable independent data that collaborates your claim that we are up
to 5 times greater. Care to produce it?
>what a waste of time this thread is.>>>
I did not intend to embarass you by my use of balanced, reasoned and
professional responses to your highly suggestive postings although I may have
done just that. If so, I apologize. I only wanted to make the simple point that
while 98% may not make 50K......most were PT and may have achieved THEIR
definition of success....if not yours. I can respect your "opinions" if they
are stated as such. Sorry if I wasted your time.
Stephen
USMCPFS wrote:
>
> > which more than 98% of the existing sales force has yet to achieve.>
>
> How do you know how many have not or will not achieved financial freedom?
the numbers I posted are from PFA headquarters website. thats how.
> I have PT reps with 6 figure investment accounts. What is their status in your
> eyes?
>
I have an uncle with a Mercedes. Big deal. You don't say how they earned the
money.
>
> >to improve tgheir quality of life,
> >went broke doing it.>>>>
>
> You tell us. And tell us where we can find that documentation.
>
tell you what, since you don't believe what I'm saying, show me documentation
from the company that gives the attrition rate of your company, how much money was
earned from non-refunded advance license payments made by people who vener passed
the exam or quit after their warm market was used up by their uplines, and show me
the income PFS makes from sales to people not in the company. i *witnessed*
families lose it all to have it all, while the RVP smiled all the way to the bank.
I *wirnessed* my RVP divorce his wife because his wife refused to play by company
rules. And I don't have to prove anything to you, nor will I. But I will continue
to share what I have witnessed with anyone who will listen.
>
> >who cares? we are not talking about them. don't try to deflect this into
> >someother arena.>>>
>
> Who cares? I do. You stated that 98% of the sales force does not earn 50K. I
> asked what percentage of them are PT. If most are PT then whether or not they
> are making 50K takes on a whole new meaning with critical analysis. Why dodge
> my question?
>
I explained to you that I am aware of how you guys sell this opportunity. "Sure,
you acn start part-time, but once you see how much money can be made, you will
want to go full-time blah blah blah. Quit playing games with me.
>
> <<<Re: 24K>>
>
> >what percentage of PFS reps make that? and how are you going to back it
> up?>>>
>
> Good point. However, you inference that all 98.1% not making 50k are
> unsuccessful allows that if even a small % make 24K your thesis is flawed.
"even if"? And what "if not?"
>
> <<few if any part time reps make that kind of money partime>>>
>
> As you say....back that up.
Nope. Don't have to. I'm quite happy to believe it and repeat from experience in
my office. Not even 10% of the full-time reps in my office could pull in more than
$12 to 14K a year: full-time! I am a witness and would swear in court that that is
what I saw in my office.
>
> > you think asking
> suggestive rhetorical open-ended questions is going to work here?>
>
> My questions were not rhetorical. I wanted answers not a dance routine.
>
Your questions are BS headgames not deserving of an answer.
>
> >answer your own stupid questions yourself>
>
> Telling.
>
> >your rhetorical nonsense is just nonsense. give me facts and don't give me
> junk.>>
>
> I personally know partimers at every level I suggested making that level of
> income.
You're the company rep. You back that up.
> So I'll rephrase my question. If only one of each is in the entire
> company would they too be failures as you have suggested in the past?
I'm not dealing in rhetorical "what ifs" with you.
> Or has
> their PT income been instrumental in achieving their goals?
I'm not dealing in speculation with you.
> Also, asking
> hypothetically (rather than rhetorically) should anyone in the future achieve
> ever achieve say 10K a year PT MIGHT that help them financially?
>
This is what I'm talking about. This question dodges all other issues and allows
only one answer. Of course, ten grand would help, but if it costs 5 grand to
make it, if they alienated 500 friends to make it, if they were taught to lie to
make that money...quite asking me stupid leading rhetorical questions that demand
only one answer. It is this approach that qualifies you and PFS agents as a group
as "salesjerks." Its a headgame you were taught by your RVP , and you teach it to
others and now you're using it on me, and it is totally offensive, unfair, and
exploitive sales tactics that I despiSE. And I despise people who think that this
is a good way to approach people about a business. "Wouldn't you LIKE to have
$10,000 a year extra?" DUH! "Wouldn't you LIKE to spend more time with your
family?" DUH! You imply and insinuate with these types of leading questions, and
then when you have cleaned out the pockets of the gullible, you say " I didn't SAY
ypou would be successful. I asked if you would LIKE to be successful." Then you
blame them for their failure and make life miserable for them until they quit. Get
a life and get a JOB!
>
> >they are far from the reality>
>
> Have you know shame? Let's break it down to the lowest level I suggested. Do
> you really suggest "few if any" make $200 - $300 a month? Again as you fairly
> ask of others....back it up.
>
> >how much less? are they 1k? 2K? 3k? You accuse me of inaccuracy but you give
> me nothing of substance,>>>
>
> I gave you your own criteria!!! You suggested that all 98% not earning 50K were
> somehow failures.
If their goal as presented by one of your companies salesjerks was financial
independence, then 98% of your salesjerks are not there. If this is such a great
opportunity, why havent they all left their j.o.b.?
> I asked if 3 of my PT'ers making less than 50K who each had 6
> figure invesment accounts were to be included in the less than 50K failure
> group? Your answer is practically juvenile.
You don't say how they earned the initial investment. That money could have come
from anywhere.
> Does it help your argument that
> they are failures if I say they make 10K instead of 25K? The point is they make
> less than 50K (your criteria) and are not failures (or broke).
>
whatever. the fact is that MUCH is implied, and LITTLE comes of it for MOST
people in your company.
> > they would mind?>>
>
> I'm sure they would mind. Can't we have any level of professional discourse?
>
No. Because I am not speaking to a professional.
>
> > then find another argument you can back up,>>
>
> Just say you won't answer the question. I don't dance.
>
> <>cut it out.>
>
> Is this where I say: No you cut it out.
>
> >unless you have reliable independent data to back up any claims you
> >make on attrition, i'm not listening.>>
>
> Critical analysis begs for evenhandedness on both sides of an issue. I only
> know that this industry has an alarming attrition rate and most professionals
> will agree with me.
aren't you at least curious? i would think that PFS's attrition rate is closer to
that of the worst MLM than the best insurance company.
> We are no different. Most don't make it. See Larry's post
> of a few days ago. 3 out of 20 hired since '97 are still in his office.
how many has PFS hired? how many have left? you dont know do you? the company
doesnt give its reps that kind of info.
> The
> numbers are alarming. I'm professional enough to admit that a company hiring PT
> will have a higher rate than those not. It stands to reason.
it also stands to reason that people who are hired using MLM salesjerk tactics
arent going to stick around.
> But I'd like to
> see your reliable independent data that collaborates your claim that we are up
> to 5 times greater. Care to produce it?
>
I dont have to produce it. and since you have snipped and edited my words, i'm
not even sure that I made that claim, or whether I said I suspected it was true.
So stop playing head games. I'm not one of your recruits or customers.
>
> >what a waste of time this thread is.>>>
>
> I did not intend to embarass you by my use of balanced, reasoned and
> professional responses to your highly suggestive postings although I may have
> done just that.
I laugh. Lol.
> If so, I apologize.
Oh, how condescending. You really are an ass.
> I only wanted to make the simple point that
> while 98% may not make 50K......most were PT and may have achieved THEIR
> definition of success....if not yours. I can respect your "opinions" if they
> are stated as such. Sorry if I wasted your time.
Please. The last thing I want is your respect for my opinions. If you are
respecting my opinion, then I'm stating my case strongly enough.
POS-Andrew
> Untrue. We have many parttimers who have been around for many years.
Why would
> they stay if they felt uncomfortable? Why wouldn't they at least try
fulltime
> if they felt so pressured? Besides how would you know? You're from
Canada. How
> can you back up these assertions with facts?
Who knows? How can you back up your contention that there are "many"
part-timers"?
<cut>
> How do you know how many have not or will not achieved financial
freedom?
Don't you think that the "financial freedom" we're talking about here
is about money derived from Primerica activities?
> I
> have PT reps with 6 figure investment accounts. What is their status
in your
> eyes?
Don't you think these "part-timers" are simply there as virtual
customers for the upline instead of real PT reps?
> >to improve tgheir quality of life,
> >went broke doing it.>>>>
>
> You tell us. And tell us where we can find that documentation.
> >who cares? we are not talking about them. don't try to deflect
this into
> >someother arena.>>>
>
> Who cares? I do. You stated that 98% of the sales force does not earn
50K. I
> asked what percentage of them are PT. If most are PT then whether or
not they
> are making 50K takes on a whole new meaning with critical analysis.
Why dodge
> my question?
That is IF one can document the "part-timers". Don't you think the %
of "part-timers" is purely subjective at this point? Don't you think
that people are *recruited* into Primerica to make a good living
instead of "just makin it" by being part-time? Did you ever consider
the fact that these "unqualified" reps are simply there as customers
for the upline while being sold a dream of being a wealthy financial
advisor someday?
> <<<Re: 24K>>
>
> >what percentage of PFS reps make that? and how are you going to
back it
> up?>>>
>
> Good point. However, you inference that all 98.1% not making 50k are
> unsuccessful allows that if even a small % make 24K your thesis is
flawed.
>
> <<few if any part time reps make that kind of money partime>>>
>
> As you say....back that up.
What about how much one can earn working for Primerica? Here are the
facts:
Some numbers from a pro-MLM site:
http://www.onlinemlm.com/copages/57.HTM
Gross sales $1,500,000,000
# of Primerica reps 153,000
That means that each reps average sales brought in to Primerica every
year is $9,804. After operating expenses and corporate salaries are
paid out, the gross amount paid out to reps would be less than that.
Might as well be flipping burgers.
But of course, you'll say these reps work "part-time". Care to back up
YOUR "part-timer" thesis in the form of documented numbers?
> > you think asking
> suggestive rhetorical open-ended questions is going to work here?>
>
> My questions were not rhetorical. I wanted answers not a dance
routine.
> >answer your own stupid questions yourself>
>
> Telling.
>
> >your rhetorical nonsense is just nonsense. give me facts and don't
give me
> junk.>>
>
> I personally know partimers at every level I suggested making that
level of
> income. So I'll rephrase my question. If only one of each is in the
entire
> company would they too be failures as you have suggested in the past?
Or has
> their PT income been instrumental in achieving their goals? Also,
asking
> hypothetically (rather than rhetorically) should anyone in the future
achieve
> ever achieve say 10K a year PT MIGHT that help them financially?
Don't you first have to define "part-time" in the form of a specific
number based on documented numbers? Maybe you don't have those numbers
and you're hypothesis is based upon guesses?
> >they are far from the reality>
>
> Have you know shame? Let's break it down to the lowest level I
suggested. Do
> you really suggest "few if any" make $200 - $300 a month? Again as
you fairly
> ask of others....back it up.
Oh, it's been backed up (less than $9k per year). Can you back up
your "part-time" assertion with numbers WITH documentation?
> >how much less? are they 1k? 2K? 3k? You accuse me of inaccuracy but
you give
> me nothing of substance,>>>
>
> I gave you your own criteria!!! You suggested that all 98% not
earning 50K were
> somehow failures. I asked if 3 of my PT'ers making less than 50K who
each had 6
> figure invesment accounts were to be included in the less than 50K
failure
> group? Your answer is practically juvenile. Does it help your
argument that
> they are failures if I say they make 10K instead of 25K? The point is
they make
> less than 50K (your criteria) and are not failures (or broke).
Don't you think that the term "failure" depends upon the goal of the
individual? Don't you think that if the goal of a Primerica rep was to
make $8,000 per year; then, that Primerica rep would be "successful"?
Don't you think that the way the get-rich-someday opportunity is *sold*
to these reps defines success as making quite a bit more than the less
than $9k averge per rep? Don't you feel that these Primerica reps are
really defined as "broke" when they don't achieve the goals *sold* to
them from the beginning?
> > they would mind?>>
>
> I'm sure they would mind. Can't we have any level of professional
discourse?
The old "you're not professional" rhetoric eh? And what exactly
constitutes "professional discourse" in your mind?
> > then find another argument you can back up,>>
>
> Just say you won't answer the question. I don't dance.
Oh no? Let's see below.
> <>cut it out.>
>
> Is this where I say: No you cut it out.
>
> >unless you have reliable independent data to back up any claims you
> >make on attrition, i'm not listening.>>
>
> Critical analysis begs for evenhandedness on both sides of an issue.
I only
> know that this industry has an alarming attrition rate and most
professionals
> will agree with me.
If one doesn't agree with you, then they're NOT professional?
>We are no different. Most don't make it. See Larry's post
> of a few days ago. 3 out of 20 hired since '97 are still in his
office. The
> numbers are alarming.
> I'm professional enough to admit that a company hiring PT
> will have a higher rate than those not.
Is that a solely a professional attribute? Does admitting that make one
a professional? Does your constant reference to "professionalism"
suggest a lack of? (telling vs. showing)
It stands to reason. But I'd like to
> see your reliable independent data that collaborates your claim that
we are up
> to 5 times greater. Care to produce it?
I would agree that Primerica's attrition rate is in line with the
industry. The MLM industry, that is. You are aware that Primerica's
main activity is to recruit warm bodies to recruit other warm bodies
just like other MLMs? You are aware that since recruiting is the main
activity, there's little time left over for acquiring any financial
expertise?
> >what a waste of time this thread is.>>>
>
> I did not intend to embarass you by my use of balanced, reasoned and
> professional responses to your highly suggestive postings although I
may have
> done just that. If so, I apologize.
Don't you think this is an insult meant to elevate yourself disguised
as a polite apology? You "dance" quite well, don't you think?
> I only wanted to make the simple point that
> while 98% may not make 50K...
So you do agree that 98% don't make $50,000?
> ...most were PT....
Don't you think you need to present the actual numbers of "part-timers"
from a documented source? Perhaps "part-timers" is a guesstimate on
your part?
>and may have achieved THEIR
> definition of success....if not yours. I can respect your "opinions"
if they
> are stated as such. Sorry if I wasted your time.
Don't you think that the Primerica upline injects the upline's
definition of success into these reps? Don't you think that the vast
majority of Primerica reps' definition of success is something higher
than grossing $50,000 per year?
POS-Andrew
USMCPFS
We've reached full circle. You (or another) makes a claim that I ask for
documentation of and then you ask for my documentation that it isn't true. Fair
enough. The only thing we will agree on is that 98% do not make 50K. I suggest
that most are parttime and you believe they are predominately fulltime. I've
participated in NG's for years and you are the first to suggest we are
primarily a fulltime force. In fact, many of the discussions I've read centered
on the premise that we were mainly parttimers. I also understand that I will
not change your mind.
Don Strevel
Yes, they really do suck and mislead people in my view. They are the Amway of
insurance. So many people in my present organization are past reps for WMA and
PFS. There is even a bit of "deprogramming" time needed to get them out of the
Moony state these guys put them in. Leaving them is a difficult thing that can
take fully, years to get over.
People feel a failure. They have introduced ALL their friends to these slick
jerks, and now they are locked in just to save face! I used to hear "lock them
in, lock them in". That means to get a few people in under them so that they
will be embarrassed to hell if they do not show up for a bullshit session
(Opportunity meeting).
God, I saw so much that I had to go to confession for just going to a meeting!
No joke! I just want to get "General Absolution" before I die in case I forgot
something in my dealings with these guys.
Don, Las Vegas
http://www.freenetbusiness.cjb.net
Don,
Las Vegas
http://www.freenetbusiness.cjb.net
SCat999999
>that most are parttime and you believe they are predominately fulltime.
Semp...
I seem to remember that he may be from Canada. In Canada you CAN'T be a part
timer in the insurance biz. That might explain his "suggestion" as you put it.
Steve,LUTCF
Anthony F. Nelson
further explain who I am in initiating this three month thread of
discussion/banter and sometimes utter non-sensical discourse, I state the
following for all to see and throw up upon, specifically the zealots:
I am a divorced and re-married (different woman each time) white male, 37
years of age. I live in Houston, Texas. Texas is a very
independent-minded
state and as such, they/we/I have a certain perspective of the rest of the
universe at-large from this place. I also must state I have lived as a
gypsy of sorts, having resided in various large and small cities in
Illinois, Minnesota and currently Texas. This is to say that a flavor of
regions has been gleaned. Also, I've traveled to nearly every major city
in
America. I have a technical and professional background in food science,
food manufacturing, food ingredient sales, ingredient purchasing having
worked for two multi-national billion dollar corporations and recently my
own small business ownership (Three start-ups, all on-going and viable.),
combined with enough life experiences to grab attention at any cocktail
party on nearly any debate or discussion of consequence and merit except
female oriented discussions. I can safely say that I feel well qualified
to
make opinions combining colloquial humor in the attempt to make something
as
serious as wealth-building into a participatory sport; to wit, this thread.
The red-neck reference to 'slamming a couple beers' was exactly to this
point. Apparently, it became gospel for another short-sighted zealot
toward
bolstering their assertion that all PFS gradu-mates are without skill or
sensibilities. IT WAS MEANT AS A LIGHT-HEARTED JOKE, NO MORE, NO LESS.
I do enjoy an above-average IQ of 169. Yep, fat-headed enough to even post
it, to be sure. However, this thread was meant as a question of merit put
to
those of you in the insurance industry, savvy enough to find this newsgroup
toward enjoining in a loose conversation about the perception of the
Prime-firm. My interest in joining an MLM distribution company which
appeared to utilize independent contractors who 'forget' to mention that
they aren't direct employees of the large firm they mention stemmed from a
phone call made to me by a long-time food sector associate. He and his
'hammer' (RVP) used a very heavy measure of 'family & friends' toward their
own best self-interest in portraying a scenario of help-the-family and get
rich doing it. The very first thing I noticed about the 'hammer' was this
gigantic ring which screamed 'look at me, look at me'.
No-one could find blame in someone or some organization in this country
seeking to make a legitimate buck. The underlying question became: What is
a legitimately earned buck? As such, the style of the MLM distribution
endeavor (in general) is 'alien' to our natural learning of hard work =
reward simply because of the dis-connect from a legitimacy perspective.
MLM
if you will, operates partly from a reliance in the harnessing of other's
goodwill for its own commercial self-interest. The MLM style of
distribution personally has a semantic feel to the word usury; not quite
all
the way, but certainly close enough for jazz when associated with the value
of exchange regarding the use of 'friends & family'.
Back to my sarcastic point-of-use in the earlier post: It is my truest
belief that any MLM has as it's first challenge the need to convince the
doubters of the MLM's merit, not the value of its product or service. Why
is that? People 'tend' to be self-preservative in their own health, well
being and in the protection of their loved ones (Friends & Family). This
natural force of initial doubt cannot easily be overcome by the use of
statistics, as is relied on in this ongoing thread. If you have any
training in the rigors of mathematical statistics (not anecdotal
numerology)
at all, you know that you can certainly make any set of numbers speak to
the
point you wish to make; conversely, the lack of stating or usage of certain
data (I think the insurance term is 'concealment'.) also suits the purpose
of de-emphasizing a negative perception of the MLM theory.
In closing, I wish everyone well and to keep a perspective on what the real
and fundamental questions are and continue to be; one-upsmanship is making
this thread difficult to read. You are all very passionate in your
positions and I respect you all for even showing your cards at all. (One
last idiom for y'all, ok, maybe THAT was the last one . . .)
Anthony
> USMCPFS <usm...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000602143816...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
> > Larry:
> >
> > >I'll slam a couple beers and let my fingers go to work picking the bare
> > >minimum to pass; then I'll go out into the world at large as speak like
> the
> > >professionally trained superstar I know I'll be . . .>>>
> >
> > Is this an example of a professional?
> >
> >
>
>
USMCPFS <usm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000602143816...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
> Larry:
>
> >I'll slam a couple beers and let my fingers go to work picking the bare
> >minimum to pass; then I'll go out into the world at large as speak like
the
> >professionally trained superstar I know I'll be . . .>>>
>
USMCPFS
>In Canada you CAN'T be a part
>timer in the insurance biz. That might explain his "suggestion" as you put
>it.>>
Understood. But we have previously addressed this issue.