Fearless Brokers on Disruption by Insurtech: ‘Bring It On’

By | July 5, 2017

  • July 5, 2017 at 8:25 am
    rocket88 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 0

    Well, there are other points to consider:
    1) From a pro insurtech point of view, if it’s cheaper than dealing with a broker, you’ll find prospects moving towards it. Especially when you consider many of these prospects incorrectly think Insurance policies are all the same and there won’t be anyone around to tell them differently until they have a loss.
    2) From the opposite side of the coin, Insurtech leaves the prospect no recourse should they make a mistake in purchasing coverages required to cover their risks. The additional costs generated by the use of brokers is a backstop in a coverage dispute.
    All this means is that brokers need to be very prepared to start the dialogue of why they are worth the added cost to net premiums.

    • July 5, 2017 at 3:09 pm
      martin says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 0

      Rocket.. It would only be a matter of time before the carriers spend that profit.. Carriers seem to squander the savings one way or another.. The only hope for the carriers would be that us agency owners don’t get together and roll our book into our company.. How many billions in premium would that be? How many dollars lost would that be to the carriers? Billions?

  • July 5, 2017 at 8:43 am
    MM says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 10

    Keep your heads in the sand fellas. Cannot keep charging outrageous commissions (climbing with selective panels now as well) the carriers are paying in their premiums and not understand they will do everything in their power to reduce the cost to administer risk over time. You need a less on innovation and change. When was the last time you went to Blockbuster video? Buy a CD from Tower Records recently?

    • July 5, 2017 at 3:00 pm
      martin says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 1

      MM.. Go tell that to my three thousand clients in my community.. I would love to see that so we both could get a good laugh.. Relationship is thicker than money.. If you don’t see that then uh oh..

  • July 5, 2017 at 2:57 pm
    martin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 2

    I think the picture that the carriers and others are not seeing is this…. If the strong brokers and Independent agents combined their books into one company, that statement would be the only conversation left.

  • July 5, 2017 at 3:51 pm
    lonestar says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    agreed Martin. When people make statement, like MM has done here, it simply shows their lack of knowledge of what it costs a carrier to operate a direct / call center model, vs. the cost to have a local agent in a community. Once you add up the cost to hire and obtain an employee, pay them health insurance, give them a 401k, time off for vacation, and then have to hire another one every few months to replace the high turnover, pay the light bills, pay for the plant, property and equipment, the direct carrier is not saving big dollars vs. having an agent. Does anyone here on this board work for free? Does a call center employee work for free? Agents don’t work for free either.

  • July 5, 2017 at 4:53 pm
    CSP says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 0

    Carriers have been predicting the end of the agency system for the last 40 years. Problem I have seen — When things go sideways, there is no one to help the customer with direct writers. I picked up more than a few clients over the years from the “you should have known better” attitude of the carriers.

    I also find it ludicrous a direct writer can sell insurance without each and every person being licensed!!

    • July 10, 2017 at 9:44 am
      Mr. Solvent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 1

      Or that a computer can bind a policy…

      If insurance is so important that the state needs to qualify all people who sell it with licensing, then why is it that the consumer is qualified to buy it by themselves?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*