Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New York Life ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New York Life ad

    Is it just me, or are there a TON of airings of a New York Life ad for whole life insurance featuring a baker with some sort of European accent? It's an annoying ad to begin with, made even moreso by the fact that whole life is terrible for most people. I want to scream at the TV every time I hear her say "it's guaranteed to keep growing!!!!"

  • #2
    Sounds like another good reason to cut the cord.

    I do miss this European Chef, though.

     

    Comment


    • #3
      This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I'm not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I'd estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.

      Comment


      • #4




        This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I’m not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is never appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I’d estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.
        Click to expand...


        Maybe people should just do some thinking for themselves.  Should every restaurant owner be held accountable to a dietary standard that requires that the food is good for you?  Should we ban soda, alcohol, and cigarettes?  Should we outlaw casinos, day trading, and gold coins? The solution isn't regulation it's education.

        Comment


        • #5
          I hope the 'education' received is by New York Life not making whole life insurance sales based on this marketing campaign.

          Comment


          • #6







            This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I’m not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is never appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I’d estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.
            Click to expand…


            Maybe people should just do some thinking for themselves.  Should every restaurant owner be held accountable to a dietary standard that requires that the food is good for you?  Should we ban soda, alcohol, and cigarettes?  Should we outlaw casinos, day trading, and gold coins? The solution isn’t regulation it’s education.
            Click to expand...


            That's fine for people like us who are intelligent and frequent websites like this, but not everyone is like us.  Sometimes people need to be protected from themselves, and from things they don't know.

            By your logic, maybe we should sell arsenic and strychnine on grocery store shelves--there are practical uses for those things and people should just do "some thinking for themselves" and not buy them and inappropriately use them.

            Comment


            • #7










              This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I’m not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is never appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I’d estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.
              Click to expand…


              Maybe people should just do some thinking for themselves.  Should every restaurant owner be held accountable to a dietary standard that requires that the food is good for you?  Should we ban soda, alcohol, and cigarettes?  Should we outlaw casinos, day trading, and gold coins? The solution isn’t regulation it’s education.
              Click to expand…


              That’s fine for people like us who are intelligent and frequent websites like this, but not everyone is like us.  Sometimes people need to be protected from themselves, and from things they don’t know.

              By your logic, maybe we should sell arsenic and strychnine on grocery store shelves–there are practical uses for those things and people should just do “some thinking for themselves” and not buy them and inappropriately use them.
              Click to expand...


              No one ever died from buying a life insurance policy, so don't think those straw men are applicable.

              I consider disclosure a part of education, and I'm all for more disclosure on financial and other products. When you increase the licenses a person needs to sell something, you just end up increasing the costs for everyone.  Frankly I'm tired of paying costs for other people.

              Comment


              • #8







                This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I’m not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is never appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I’d estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.
                Click to expand…


                Maybe people should just do some thinking for themselves.  Should every restaurant owner be held accountable to a dietary standard that requires that the food is good for you?  Should we ban soda, alcohol, and cigarettes?  Should we outlaw casinos, day trading, and gold coins? The solution isn’t regulation it’s education.
                Click to expand...


                I ultimately agree with you but I think he's got a point.  The products should be offered, people should be free to buy them, but the big difference is the predatory aggressive salesmen.  These guys and gals will flat out tell you they have your best interests at heart, in essence, claiming to be a fiduciary, when they are anything but, and they literally lie to you (either through ignorance or knowingly, i.e., fraudulently) in order to sell you a policy or a highly commissioned investment product.  They're allowed to prey on the weak and the uninformed, with people's livelihoods at stake.

                The difference between these financial guys and all the products you named is that the restaurant owners and liquor stores and casinos aren't buying you lunch and telling you they're your best friend and that you can't lose and this is the best investment you'll ever make (well, save the gold coin ads  :lol: ).

                And, for what it's worth, about half of those things you listed have been historically illegal at one time or another, casinos are still illegal in many states, and each one of those things is highly regulated.

                 

                 

                Comment


                • #9










                  This is why EVERY advisor, regardless of title (like insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker) should be held to a FIDUCIARY STANDARD. That would put an end to the large number of inappropriate permanent life insurance sales. I’m not saying there is never a situation where permanent life (whole, universal, or variable) is never appropriate; but those situations are few and far between. I’d estimate that over 95% of the population should never buy anything other than term life.
                  Click to expand…


                  Maybe people should just do some thinking for themselves.  Should every restaurant owner be held accountable to a dietary standard that requires that the food is good for you?  Should we ban soda, alcohol, and cigarettes?  Should we outlaw casinos, day trading, and gold coins? The solution isn’t regulation it’s education.
                  Click to expand…


                  I ultimately agree with you but I think he’s got a point.  The products should be offered, people should be free to buy them, but the big difference is the predatory aggressive salesmen.  These guys and gals will flat out tell you they have your best interests at heart, in essence, claiming to be a fiduciary, when they are anything but, and they literally lie to you (either through ignorance or knowingly, i.e., fraudulently) in order to sell you a policy or a highly commissioned investment product.  They’re allowed to prey on the weak and the uninformed, with people’s livelihoods at stake.

                  The difference between these financial guys and all the products you named is that the restaurant owners and liquor stores and casinos aren’t buying you lunch and telling you they’re your best friend and that you can’t lose and this is the best investment you’ll ever make (well, save the gold coin ads

                  And, for what it’s worth, about half of those things you listed have been historically illegal at one time or another, casinos are still illegal in many states, and each one of those things is highly regulated.

                   

                   
                  Click to expand...


                  Requiring every insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker to become a fiduciary will cause transaction costs associated with buying insurance, stocks, mutual funds, etc. to skyrocket.  You think discount brokerages will exist after you require anyone who sells any of those products to become a fiduciary? You convince regulators that people are incapable of understanding that massive front-end loads or whole life insurance products are bad for them, regulators will take away the ability to buy any financial product except through a fiduciary.  We need to manage up, not down.

                  Regarding the last point, stocks, mutual funds, and insurance are already highly regulated.

                  Comment


                  • #10




                    Requiring every insurance agent, financial planner, investment manager, or stock broker to become a fiduciary will cause transaction costs associated with buying insurance, stocks, mutual funds, etc. to skyrocket
                    Click to expand...


                    Why would prices skyrocket? If all insurance agents, financial planners, investment managers, and stock brokers are already acting in the clients' best interests, nothing would change. However, if sales of products would fall because of the sales that would no longer take place because those same "advisors" couldn't dupe consumers; then, yes prices might rise. Or, it would thin the herd and result in few advisors.




                    You think discount brokerages will exist after you require anyone who sells any of those products to become a fiduciary?
                    Click to expand...


                    Actually, discount brokerages are not selling investments. They are processing transactions initiated by the client. Just as a stock broker is not even held to a suitability standard when a client walks in off the street and says they want to buy 1,000 shares of Amazon.




                    You convince regulators that people are incapable of understanding that massive front-end loads or whole life insurance products are bad for them, regulators will take away the ability to buy any financial product except through a fiduciary.
                    Click to expand...


                    That's my point, exactly! They should only be able to buy those products through a fiduciary. Do you really mean to tell me that you expect an average consumer (************************, even a knowledgeable consumer) to be able to understand the inner workings of an indexed annuity and it's various crediting options? I bet that 80% of insurance agents can't even accurately explain their own company's products - let alone those of their competitors.

                    I guess we'll agree to disagree on this issue. I respect your opinion, even though I don't understand it.

                    I simply don't understand how advisors who already act as a fiduciary (whether required to, or not) could possible disagree with applying it to all advisors. And advisors who don't assume the mantle of fiduciary (whether required to, or not), are the ones that give our industry a black eye.

                    I've seen way too many inappropriate "permanent life as a retirement plan" sales that backfired, too many "index annuities give you stock market returns with no risk of loss" index annuity sales, and too many "your principal is guaranteed (only if you die without taking distributions) variable annuity sales where people lost upwards of half their account value, to keep my mouth shut and watch innocent consumers get screwed any longer. The time for fiduciary duty on the part of all advisors has come.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The implication is that you want all of insurance agents, financial planners, investment managers, and stock brokers to become RIAs or some other registered fiduciary, which requires costs, training, and licenses.  If a person needs to use an RIA to buy stocks, mutual funds, and insurance, it will cause transaction costs to increase.  The barrier to entry to become an insurance agent or a broker now is lower, so the cost per transaction is less than it would be if you required these people to become registered fiduciaries.

                      When you say you want all stock brokers to be fiduciaries, the implication in your post was that you wanted stock brokers held to the suitability standard that you say doesn't exist regarding the purchase of 1,000 shares of Amazon by a random guy on the street.  If I have to buy my 5k shares of Amazon through a fiduciary under your proposal, my costs will increase.  But then maybe you say Amazon is OK to buy on your own, but ETFs are not.   Or ETFs are OK, but double levered ETFs are not.  Or maybe double levered ETFs are OK, but short ETFs are not.  Or maybe anything is OK as long as there's no sales load and ER is less than 50bps.  I don't really know where you draw the line.

                      I agree that most people don't understand most insurance policies.  I also agree that whole life is a bad policy that shouldn't be bought by most people who buy it.  The problem is that it is you who is deciding that whole life is too complex for consumers, so should only be sold through fiduciaries.  The issue is that it soon becomes any insurance should only be sold through fiduciaries.  Otherwise it becomes quite difficult to establish bright line differences between different insurance products.

                       

                      Comment


                      • #12


                        The barrier to entry to become an insurance agent or a broker now is lower, so the cost per transaction is less than it would be if you required these people to become registered fiduciaries.
                        Click to expand...


                        Some food for thought, regarding your view that holding advisors to a fiduciary standard would increase costs to consumers.

                        https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-fiduciarypath-survey-dol-fiduciary-rule-does-cost-mcbride-aifa-

                         

                        Comment


                        • #13





                          The barrier to entry to become an insurance agent or a broker now is lower, so the cost per transaction is less than it would be if you required these people to become registered fiduciaries. 
                          Click to expand…


                          Some food for thought, regarding your view that holding advisors to a fiduciary standard would increase costs to consumers.

                          https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-fiduciarypath-survey-dol-fiduciary-rule-does-cost-mcbride-aifa-

                           
                          Click to expand...


                          Most people buy insurance (term, whole, auto, home) through an agent.  The price through the agent typically sets the market price for the product even if you buy directly because the insurance company wants to avoid channel conflict, i.e. offering a lower price direct than through an agent.  Basic laws of supply and demand tell you that agent commissions will increase if there are fewer agents than before, especially if these agents have additional licenses.

                          Regarding your suggestions and the link, I have a hard time imagining a scenario where if I call a broker to make a stock transaction, that broker is required to be a fiduciary, even though the broker is not giving advice.  However, I would be free to "call" a discount internet broker to make the transaction.  In each case, the "broker" is just executing a trade as requested by the customer, but in one case the broker has to be a fiduciary.

                           

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X