- Thread starter
- #91
I have a relative considering getting licensed. As much as my original post has gotten way off track, I still lack understanding. From what I've been able to piece together from all of these responses, including the plethora of those failing to address the question directly is:
1. FEX has the highest commission of any IMO, period. If that is true, 100% is now street level. That would be understandable.
2. Or, FEX has the highest commission, conditional upon production or negotiation. If this is true, then 100% is not street, and asking FEX for street is like having to negotiate with your boss every time you think you deserve a raise. This defeats the purpose of being self employed, if someone else controls your income.
3. If commissions are negotiable and conditional, that structure is no different or awfully similar to that of SL and LH. For that reason, I am hoping I have interpreted the responses incorrectly.
Orgs like SL, LH justify their commission reduction by pimping agency building. If FEX is providing the same quality training they always have, the best lead providers, etc., I am still missing the "why" behind cutting commissions. What additional risks or expenses have FEX incurred resulting from those agents looking for street level commissions, regardless of how many or few policies they want to write?
I appreciate all FEX has done in the past and what they do now, however, it still does not explain why they are taking away 20-25% from a new agent, nor does it explain what they intend to do with the additional profit. Again, this assume street level across the board is now 100%. According to what I have read, the reduction in commission is the only thing that has changed. How does the retired part-time agent who only wants to write an occasional policy create additional risk to an IMO, justifying reducing their commission?
I'm just trying to see the wisdom and make sense of all of this. Call me analytical.
"....but in all thy getting, get understanding"- Proverbs 4:7
1. FEX has the highest commission of any IMO, period. If that is true, 100% is now street level. That would be understandable.
2. Or, FEX has the highest commission, conditional upon production or negotiation. If this is true, then 100% is not street, and asking FEX for street is like having to negotiate with your boss every time you think you deserve a raise. This defeats the purpose of being self employed, if someone else controls your income.
3. If commissions are negotiable and conditional, that structure is no different or awfully similar to that of SL and LH. For that reason, I am hoping I have interpreted the responses incorrectly.
Orgs like SL, LH justify their commission reduction by pimping agency building. If FEX is providing the same quality training they always have, the best lead providers, etc., I am still missing the "why" behind cutting commissions. What additional risks or expenses have FEX incurred resulting from those agents looking for street level commissions, regardless of how many or few policies they want to write?
I appreciate all FEX has done in the past and what they do now, however, it still does not explain why they are taking away 20-25% from a new agent, nor does it explain what they intend to do with the additional profit. Again, this assume street level across the board is now 100%. According to what I have read, the reduction in commission is the only thing that has changed. How does the retired part-time agent who only wants to write an occasional policy create additional risk to an IMO, justifying reducing their commission?
I'm just trying to see the wisdom and make sense of all of this. Call me analytical.
"....but in all thy getting, get understanding"- Proverbs 4:7
, elephant ankles . That's the funniest thing I e heard of this board . I don't think I got elephant ankles
