Re: an advantage of par whole life -- Insurance Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Mon, May 18 2026, 13:02:31 [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wed, August 07 2002, 0:21:43
Author: Brent D. Gardner, ChFC
Subject:

Re: an advantage of par whole life
In reply to: Rich Franzen 's message, "Re: an advantage of par whole life" on Tue, August 06 2002, 19:09:16

>About a year ago, someone sniped at me on a board
>(probably MIFP) because I somehow mentioned that whole
>life policies were subject to MEC provisions. A reply
>stated emphatically that MEC's only apply to Variable
>type policies. Geez, for a year now I've been
>wondering why my WL policy illustrations say that the
>proposed policy has been tested and is not an MEC...

Some people just don't know what they don't know. =)

When TAMRA and TEFRA were enacted, VUL was probably less than 1% of new annualized premium (mid 1980s), so whoever gave you grief has probably only been around as long as I have, or less, and they aren't much of student of the industry and history as I am. =)

>Not to insult your friend, but in what way were his
>actions different than the Al Williams & Primerica
>crowd? Is there a "good" kind of twisting?

He's not really a friend, just the founder of my broker/dealer. He met with me to persuade me to join up. I almost walked out when I realized he was a termite, but then he spent some time explaining what he'd been doing. He wasn't twisting, just presenting an alternative. ALW/PFS did the opposite -- they trashed any and every policy and company as inferior. Back in the 1950s, half of the permanent insurance was NON PAR whole life sold by stock companies, and it was then, and is now, VERY EASY to replace, even with more expensive par or interest sensitive products. Replacing NON par whole life with term and a contractual plan was doing most of these people a favor. =)

Of course, this is all hearsay. Frankly, I try to learn from everyone, even when they don't do things the way I do. I'm not a "termite" but I sell a lot of term insurance. I just also sell whole life, UL, VUL, single premium, etc.

One of the things I try to remind people is that BTID is a replacement strategy, more so than a financial planning strategy. The idea is to replace existing permanent insurance with term and some other investment. This generates mega commissions without having to do any real selling, because the easiest sale is replacing the premium that is already being paid. The origination of this term is from the 1930s (AL Williams wasn't even born yet), and the idea actually dates from the late 1800s when mutual companies were starting to sprout up (as "alternative uses of legal reserves"). I actually called Dr. Ed Graves about this a few years ago. He's the editor of McGill's Life Insurance (textbook) and a professor at The American College. He gave me several references that predate his own birth, so this stuff ain't exactly new. =)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]