Infofree.com
- Thread starter saoj
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #2
- Thread starter
- #3
Yeah but what I want to know is how the leads come in and what information comes with the leads. Are these people looking or interested in life insurance, or simple name and address on a database? Are these leads similar to cold, warm, or hot leads?
That's not what you asked in your initial post. For the information you're asking about in the post I quoted, you might contact them direct.
- 11,997
These aren't lists of people who have expressed interest in buying insurance, it's just name and address phone numbers. I signed up with them to check them out and see what it was like. I also talked to the folks over there and it seems like a neat system, but I'm curious about how sustainable it is. They are also compiling their own databases (or so they say) which means the quality is probably going to suffer, but for the price, it's a heck of a lot better than using the phone book. The system is not without limits, but they certainly have a market.
To get back to the question of "how (do) the leads come in and what information comes with the leads", it's similar to any other list vendor/list broker. List brokers like myself pull from a national database that is updated every two weeks from hundreds (if not thousands) of sources. Where you'll see a difference in quality is in what is done to keep a list updated and/or keep the information going into the system accurate to begin with. You can go to datadepot.biz and get 1 million records for $299 or 180 million records for $3,999. Considering what's available for less than $10k you can buy every record available and have a nifty little website where people can download records, but, you're dealing with what is at best sub-par data. When you consider the disconnects, wrong numbers, bad addresses, bad contact info, the true cost of cheap data can be quite high, especially if you're doing direct mail. Does that mean it's a bad product? Not necessarily, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
Was that helpful?
- 14,808
I think you're dead on Josh. Anyone can spend a few grand and grab millions of records, then create a site and start charging. Don't think it's all that difficult.
- 11,997
I was going to pass on commenting on this, but a friend of mine pointed out that Daytona Guy's latest video said "stop buying lists from these idiots on the forum". He certainly believes that another company offers a better value for an agent's marketing dollar and we're all entitled to our opinions, but I think it says something about a guy if he'll put together a "training" video and call someone like myself and ***.
Let's consider the gentleman saying, almost by name, that I am an *** and is claiming that there are loopholes around the voice broadcasting laws.
You can't voice broadcast to sell insurance products. It's simply illegal.
I think it's interesting that Chris took the time to put together some research on the matter. Chris cites the McCarran-Ferguson Act as a justification for why he thinks he can voice broadcast, but the link on that slide doesn't mention it anywhere. He also suggests a theory that because there is a HIPAA exception to the robocall legislation and the insurance applications have a HIPAA section on them, that perhaps that creates an exemption. That's not at all an exception, the bottom line is that you can't use a prerecorded message to sell insurance. If selling insurance is your ultimate goal and using a prerecorded message as your method of obtaining that information, it's a violation of the law. Will you get caught? Maybe not. But still very much illegal.
Let's also consider this, the "system" Chris is promoting here, is not only illegal and comes with the risk of a $16,000/call fine (100 calls is up to $1.6 million) and he's selling them "at cost" to agents 10,000 at a clip. Ignoring that point, you're looking at a .002% response rate (again, according to his numbers). Most agents don't have the ability to do that in their area a sole source of leads and it's one of the underlying problems with voice broadcasting if you're looking for steady income. It's simply not sustainable. Compare that 0.002% response rate to a 2% response rate on cold calling oneself, and that's a huge deal.
On a slightly different note, but still in his most recent video, Chris was promoting the hell out of FinalExpenseByPhone.com, and now he says it's a scam. Do you think he'll come along later and say "I found out voice broadcasting is still illegal, oops."
Why would Chris promote a system that is illegal? So that he can make $200/order off of agents providing his illegal service.
Not so long ago Chris was selling telemarketed Medicare leads at voiceleadorder.com, now he's selling autodialer services (which are illegal), what will he do next?
Let's consider the gentleman saying, almost by name, that I am an *** and is claiming that there are loopholes around the voice broadcasting laws.
You can't voice broadcast to sell insurance products. It's simply illegal.
I think it's interesting that Chris took the time to put together some research on the matter. Chris cites the McCarran-Ferguson Act as a justification for why he thinks he can voice broadcast, but the link on that slide doesn't mention it anywhere. He also suggests a theory that because there is a HIPAA exception to the robocall legislation and the insurance applications have a HIPAA section on them, that perhaps that creates an exemption. That's not at all an exception, the bottom line is that you can't use a prerecorded message to sell insurance. If selling insurance is your ultimate goal and using a prerecorded message as your method of obtaining that information, it's a violation of the law. Will you get caught? Maybe not. But still very much illegal.
Let's also consider this, the "system" Chris is promoting here, is not only illegal and comes with the risk of a $16,000/call fine (100 calls is up to $1.6 million) and he's selling them "at cost" to agents 10,000 at a clip. Ignoring that point, you're looking at a .002% response rate (again, according to his numbers). Most agents don't have the ability to do that in their area a sole source of leads and it's one of the underlying problems with voice broadcasting if you're looking for steady income. It's simply not sustainable. Compare that 0.002% response rate to a 2% response rate on cold calling oneself, and that's a huge deal.
On a slightly different note, but still in his most recent video, Chris was promoting the hell out of FinalExpenseByPhone.com, and now he says it's a scam. Do you think he'll come along later and say "I found out voice broadcasting is still illegal, oops."
Why would Chris promote a system that is illegal? So that he can make $200/order off of agents providing his illegal service.
Not so long ago Chris was selling telemarketed Medicare leads at voiceleadorder.com, now he's selling autodialer services (which are illegal), what will he do next?
alicia
Expert
- 52
It may be legal or not, but if it's questionable, I think one should stay away. I agree that his comment was not necessary.
- 1,311
I never called you an ***, Josh.
The fact is that agents can get this exact same data for $24.95 per month/UNLIMITED.
As you spend your day watching my videos, you should pay closer attention. The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 states that federal statutes (such as FTC rule on voice broadcasting) does not apply to insurance as insurance laws are the domain of the states.
Since your Google search doesn't work:
McCarran-Ferguson Act of (1945) - Insurance, Business, Federal, and Law - JRank Articles
McCarran-Ferguson Act
The McCarran-Ferguson Act: Regulating The Industry
"It explicitly empowers states to regulate and tax insurance."
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/08/fyi0350.shtm
"Commission approval of advisory letter: The Commission has approved the issuance of a staff advisory opinion setting forth the extent to which the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) reaches telemarketing on behalf of insurance companies. The opinion, which is available on the FTC's Web page as a link to this press release, was developed at the request of Stonebridge Life Insurance Company, and specifically addresses whether the McCarran-Ferguson Act exempts companies telemarketing on behalf of insurance companies from coverage by the TSR.
The staff opinion first provides general information on the jurisdictional limitations of the FTC Act, stating that the TSR is subject to the same limitations. The advisory goes on to note the distinction between "status" exemptions, such as those afforded banks, credit unions, and savings and loans, and "activity" exemptions, such as that for the business of insurance to the extent that it is regulated by state law as set forth in the McCarran-Ferguson Act. The opinion then describes the three-part test used to determine whether a particular activity constitutes the "business of insurance," and notes that even if an activity meets that three-part test, it also is necessary to determine whether the activity is "regulated by state law," and whether the state regulation was enacted for the purpose of regulating the "business of insurance."
Accordingly, the comment states the FTC may assert jurisdiction over the telemarketing of insurance products only if the telemarketing activity fails the three-prong test and/or the state regulation test. Whether the telemarketing is done by third-party callers or the insurance companies themselves is not the issue: "[t]he decisive issues are whether the activity constitutes 'the business of insurance' and whether it is regulated by state law." The advisory concludes that "in order to make a specific determination on the Rule's applicability to Stonebridge's telemarketing, the Commission would need additional information, such as the nature of the product offered, the state(s) in which it is sold, and the extent of state regulation in those states. The Commission vote approving issuance of the advisory letter was 4-0-1, with Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour not participating. (File No. R411001; staff contact is Catherine Harrington-McBride, Bureau of Consumer Protection, 202-326-2452)."
http://www.the-dma.org/telemarketing/tsr_compliance_guide.pdf
"Coverage of the Business of
Insurance Is Limited
The McCarran-Ferguson Act provides that the FTC
Act, and by extension, the TSR, are applicable to
the business of insurance to the extent that such
business is not regulated by state law.Whether the
McCarran-Ferguson exemption removes
insurance-related telemarketing from coverage of
the TSR depends on the extent to which state law
regulates the telemarketing at issue and whether
enforcement of the TSR would conflict with, and
effectively supersede, those state regulations.
Unlike the jurisdictional exemptions for banks and
non-profit organizations, which do not extend to
third-party telemarketers making calls on their
behalf, in the case of the telemarketing of
insurance products and services, the TSR does not
necessarily apply simply because the campaign is
conducted by a third-party telemarketer."
Absolutely right. That's why we sell medicare by telephone in 32 states. It is HIGHLY sustainable and quite profitable!
Same site, same service. Thanks for the plug.
Not paying attention, again, I see. What I said was that agents that are being told to pay for a CRM system and paying to purchase leads will not have a sustainable business model with long term success selling final expense by phone UNLESS there is, first, a relationship with the person with whom they are trying to sell. I said that creating a value proposition with that client by first saving them money on a Medicare Supplement increases retention and return on lead investment.
To the extent that a new agent is led to believe he or she can sit in their underwear and sell final expense by phone all day with a magical system (once they pay to be involved, pay for a CRM, pay for leads) is fantasy, due to the fact that the persistency will not sustain that kind of model over time.
This is only based on experience with hundreds upon hundreds of agents who have tried it through other organizations and failed, but it is definitely my conclusion to which I am entitled. I'm sure it does work for some people, but not the masses who are recruited by final expense telesales organizations and spend through their savings to learn otherwise.
Yes, I own finalexpensebyphone.com, but there's a right way to sell final expense by phone and a wrong way. I believe in the relationship sale first - being a trusted advisor first.
.
Last edited:
- 15,319
Chris, voice broadcast for insurance purposes is illegal to residences. Period. There is no BS that the states control insurance, etc. You are passing on incorrect information to agents that think you actually know what you're doing.
Several years ago you posted a recording of Frank Stastny's training on your website. You never had permission but at least you had the "class" to state it was his training. Too bad you never got permission. Pretty much says all that is needed about honesty.
Lastly, only one of you spends time on the forum discussing insurance rather than showing up when there is something to sell.
One of you has credibility; one does not. I think it's easy for everyone to see which is which.
Rick
Several years ago you posted a recording of Frank Stastny's training on your website. You never had permission but at least you had the "class" to state it was his training. Too bad you never got permission. Pretty much says all that is needed about honesty.
Lastly, only one of you spends time on the forum discussing insurance rather than showing up when there is something to sell.
One of you has credibility; one does not. I think it's easy for everyone to see which is which.
Rick
