Axa/equitable

Not to mention...a commercial banker of mine closed a nice loan today (3.5 million) and set me up with the guy for next week.  He has a 2 million dollar annuity right now...

I hope it's plain vanilla and out of surrender...talk about a good day!!!

Bank,

Can you crystallize the pros and cons of what you did today versus simply dividing assets into a taxable account say with a conservative allocation  40% equities 60% fixed income?

I am trying to find the positives of a VA versus a taxable account.

thanks

scrim

Bank,

Do you have to annuitize and give up control of the assets to get that GMIB?

If so, how do you explain in layman's terms to your client as I have some problem explaining this very succintly.

Thanks in advance.

scrim

[quote=BankFC]

Ahhh...good day. 

$380,000 new money into AXA/Equitable Accumulator VA.  Guaranteed 6% GMIB, plus a nice enhanced Death Benefit (ya'll should check it out).

Clients loved it, more than willing to pay the fees for the peace of mind, and I got paid nicely.

This is a great business...sometimes, lol. 

[/quote]

Nice ticket! What was the commish?

AXA and ING are the only annuities I will use.  Those guarantees are sweeeet.  Forget Hartford, Nationwide, AIG, etc.

[quote=iconsult100]AXA and ING are the only annuities I will use.  Those guarantees are sweeeet.  Forget Hartford, Nationwide, AIG, etc.[/quote]

What?  No Riversource (former American Express) or Allstate?

[quote=menotellname]

[quote=iconsult100]AXA and ING are the only annuities I will use.  Those guarantees are sweeeet.  Forget Hartford, Nationwide, AIG, etc.[/quote]

What?  No Riversource (former American Express) or Allstate?

[/quote]

Had already forgotten them.

Scrim,

First of all, I just want to make it clear that I'm not going to get into a pissing match with the anti-VA crowd here.  With that being said, I thing you genuinely want to learn, so I am happy to share my opinions with you.

To answer your second question first...

No, the GMIB does not require annuitization.  None of the annuities I sell do, and there are many that do not (ING just changed, John Hancock, Allianz, Hartford, Nationwide...the list goes on).  

To answer your first question second... 

Without going too far in depth, the situation was a husband and wife, 57 and 62, who have retired and need consistent, predictable income NOW.  They are retired, and don't want uncertainty.

Note:

Regarding your allocation:  It's not enough to say 40% equities and 60% fixed income.  What are we talking about really?  Blue chips stocks?  Small and mid cap mutual funds?  It makes a difference.  For examples sake, lets just assume a diversified portfolio of equities.

I don't care what anyone says, it SUCKS to be in the fixed income business right now, flat (even inverted) yield curve, rising interest rates...not fun.  Just about anything you sell that is long (say 10 years or more) is going to lose value on the statement. 

And you know as well as I (I assume) on individual bonds you can't get any decent yield without going out 10 years or more, sometimes not even then, and your basically asking to lose principle in a rising interest rate environment unless you hold them to maturity.

My point...I'd much rather have my clients overweighted in equites in this market across all the risk allocation spectrums.  But you MUST do this in a responsible way.  In other words....

I'd much rather have a 70/30 stock to bond ratio and give up around 1.5% in the form of an M&E to hedge the equity risk with a guarantee in exchange for the MUCH HIGHER upside potential of the equities compared to the fixed income. 

I highlighted that because I really think that's where the rubber meets the road, so to speak.  People can sleep easier while taking on more equity exposure than they would outside the VA BECAUSE of the guarantee.

I don't know the numbers, but I am going to be willing to bet that, on average a 70/30 stock to bond allocation will, over time, outperform a 40/60 stock to bond allocation by quite a bit more than 1.5%.

I say on average because I'm sure someone can produce some 40/60 model that went through the roof, but I have yet to find that crystal ball on EBAY...

I'm not saying I know it all, the way I do it is the only way to do it, etc.  In fact, in a perfect world, all my clients would be logical, understand and accept risk, I'd have 200MM in individual securities managed money, 2 hot assistants, and date Jessica Simpson.

But the fact is none of that is true.  However, in the mean time, I can do well for my clients, help them FEEL GOOD about their money and their retirement, and make a pretty decent living myself.

P.S.  Dirk, to answer your question, my B/D doesn't take haircuts (to my knowledge) so I got 7% gross, and I am netting 37.5% of that.  

I know, I know, it's not 90%, but that's a whole other debate we've already had, so let's let a sleeping dog lie. 

I should have noted, the customers still have about $300,000 in NQ mutual funds, and I even recommended they take $75,000 that he wanted to keep liquid and stick it in that darn INGdirect account. 

4.75% LIQUID MONEY!!!

Hard to beat that.

[quote=BankFC]

P.S.  Dirk, to answer your question, my B/D doesn't take haircuts (to my knowledge) so I got 7% gross, and I am netting 37.5% of that.  

I know, I know, it's not 90%, but that's a whole other debate we've already had, so let's let a sleeping dog lie. 

[/quote]

I'm cool with that. Nice ticket!

That’s a $10,000 day…I’ll take that.  Also, nice job of explaining to scrim the rationale of overweighting in equities, BUT in a controlled environment (VA).  I did the same thing today, but it was $114,000 and was in ING Landmark (4% up front, 1% each year thereafter).  My day was $4,100…

Thanks for the valuable feedback.

So can you further explain this 6% guarantee w/o having to annuitize?

Is it as easy as saying if someone puts in $1,000,000 they can take out $60,000/year without penalty?     In this scenario if the performance of the sub accounts is flat for the whole year they still have $1,000,000 even after withdrawing 60k?

scrim

Regarding this GMIB without annuitization, what exactly is "the catch" in the fine print.

Maybe there is no catch.  I'm really not sure.

Do some of the assets have to be in a guaranteed account?

scrim

Again,

I'm not necessarily Anti-Annuity.

Self admittedly, I just don't get it I guess.

scrim

[quote=Indyone]That's a $10,000 day...I'll take that.  Also, nice job of explaining to scrim the rationale of overweighting in equities, BUT in a controlled environment (VA).  I did the same thing today, but it was $114,000 and was in ING Landmark (4% up front, 1% each year thereafter).  My day was $4,100...[/quote]

Another nice ticket. Good job.

In effect can't I just have a client invest their money in some kind of asset allocation that closely matches their risk tolerance?

At some time in the future begin making "annuity type"  payments which will be taxed more favorably and keep their costs a bit lower?

Regarding the death benefit it's quite clear from other postings that this is not a great way to leave money as a legacy.

What exactly are the positives?

I guess I'm having problems mostly understading the GMIB w/o annuitization still.

scrim

I just sat back and reread all my posts the last few minutes.

I keep coming to the same conclusion.

I'm a college graduate, in the financial field for 16 years, and am reasonably intelligent.

The fact that I cannot grasp this concept with 100% certaintly tells me that clients can't possibly understand this product.

Like I've said before, I don't want to have a client put their money into something they cannot fully understand.

I think my clients can understand an asset allocation portfolio based on their time frame and risk tolerance as opposed to a convoluted VA contract.

As long as we are putting our clients interests first, what does it matter if we are putting our clients into mutual funds, VA's, EIA's, managed money, etc.    There is no one size fits all.

Thanks for letting me babble.

Have a great weekend.

scrim

Scrim,

The biggest differential is the guarantee.  I am admittedly a big fan of fee-based accounts (and do quite a bit more of those than I do annuities), but, like today, I ran into a prospect that was just flat-out not comfortable with the equity market and a fee-based arrangement that was not "guaranteed".  A competitor had shown them a nice hypo mix of American funds, with a 6% withdrawal that had performed admirably over the last 25 years (like a 15% average), but the bottom line was, it was not guaranteed and in the process of probing the prospects, it was obvious to me that they were VERY uncomfortable about the possibility of principal loss.

I showed them two illustrations (20K and 94K) and reading numbers from the 94K illustration, actual performance showed 82K in distributions in the first ten years, and the option to lock in at the end of ten years at $9,427 annually for life (couple is 69 & 72 at that point).  What if they die two years later you say?  The death benefit to their heirs at year 12 is 162K.  Even the 0% market performance minimum guarantees show 35K in distributions in years 1-10, the ability to lock in at $6,209/year at year ten, and a death benefit at year 12 of 101K.  These are just some of the numbers in the illustration, but I think you get the point.

The bottom line is, yes, most likely a fee-based account will perform better over the years due to expenses, but these people couldn't care less.  All they cared about was that they can make much more than they can in CDs and yet, they have a guarantee against principal loss...THAT is where an annuity is a tremendous option to have.  I got the business even though my performance lagged well behind what the other rep had shown them, because I could provide a guarantee.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it...

I guess maybe I live in a vacuum.

How can an appropriate mixture of stock and bonds lose principal over a long time frame?

I think it's almost impossible.

Am I not thinking outside the box here?

scrim

[quote=scrim67]I guess maybe I live in a vacuum.

How can an appropriate mixture of stock and bonds lose principal over a long time frame?

I think it's almost impossible.

Am I not thinking outside the box here?

scrim[/quote]

Scrim, I agree that it is very unlikely, but that doesn't matter to some folks.  If it is theoretically possible, they don't want it. Period.  So you find something with a guarantee, that yes, probably makes less over time, but will not lose principal...and the clients are happy as a lark...and couldn't care less that their neighbor is averaging 2%/year more than they are. ("...but his principal is not guaranteed")

I have occasionally a tough time overcoming lack of FDIC insurance.

How do overcome no FDIC or SIPC?

scrim

[quote=scrim67]

I have occasionally a tough time overcoming lack of FDIC insurance.

How do overcome no FDIC or SIPC?

scrim

[/quote]

Offer them brokered CD's for one.

Your platform offers SIPC insurance bro.  You should make sure your branch manager has his signs posted, otherwise he'll get a black mark on his compliance audit.

joe,

sorry for the confusion.

so an insurance product is SIPC insured?

we do have SIPC...I didn't realize it covered insurance products.

i'm learning every day

scrim

[quote=scrim67]I have occasionally a tough time overcoming lack of FDIC insurance.

How do overcome no FDIC or SIPC?

scrim[/quote]

First pick a solid insurance company.  The Hartford has been around almost 200 years...much longer than the FDIC system.  ING is one rung below triple-A.  Then there are the reserves that insurance companies are required to maintain to back up their claims-paying abilities, and finally, as Joe alluded to, the SIPC system is in place for at least most reputable Broker/dealers...

Bottom line is, these guarantees are as solid as the firms behind them...choose wisely and you won't have any problem selling the guarantees...

[quote=scrim67]joe,

sorry for the confusion.

so an insurance product is SIPC insured?

we do have SIPC...I didn't realize it covered insurance products.

i'm learning every day

scrim[/quote]

In reality, SIPC doesn't cover much of anything, other than your assets disappearing from a failed broker/dealer, but it kind of sounds like FDIC and that makes Joe Customer feel good...

yeah,

anytime I explain how SIPC insurance works I always tell them, in reality you really don't need SIPC or FDIC insurance for that matter, but you don't have a chance to decline it like at a rental car place.

customer never seems to object to that explanation.

scrim

[quote=scrim67]

I guess maybe I live in a vacuum.

How can an appropriate mixture of stock and bonds lose principal over a long time frame?

I think it's almost impossible.

Am I not thinking outside the box here?

scrim

[/quote]

You are ignoring the fact that people are afraid of losing money. People make investment decisions based on fear and greed, not logic. The annuity that I use appeals to both fear AND greed. When you're talking about asset allocation, you're coming straight out of your head. They may be smiling, while you talk, but you're not hitting them where it counts.

"The annuity that I use appeals to both fear AND greed."

Scrim,

I'm afraid that maybe you do live in a vacuum a little bit when it comes to understanding clients needs.

First of all, regarding understanding of product (both you and the client) I really feel that...

#1 you haven't taken the time to TRY to understand the aspects of GMIB VA's.  They aren't that hard to understand.  Instead of posting random questions about them on the board, why don't you call the sales desk at one of the aforementioned companies and learn about them, then make AN EDUCATED DECISION.

#2  You completely disregarded my point, my MAIN point, about how using a VA can hedge a more equity allocated portfolio, and over time net much more than the VA fee anyway!!

#3  Do you really think a client understands "fully" how a mutual fund works?  What the administration costs are, what the trading costs are (these aren't disclosed, do YOU even know what they are?), How the securities are selected, etc.  I submit that if a client can, as you say, "fully" understand a mutual fund, they can "fully" undertstand a VA.  Disagree?

You seem to me to be a purist.  Someone who has unfallible faith in the long term returns of the market.  To a great extent so am I, otherwise why would I be in the business?

HOWEVER, what you must realize it isn't MARKET returns investors care about, its INVESTOR returns investors care about.  They want, they NEED (on an emotional level anyway), to feel safe that their retirement dollars (aka thier lifestyle) will not be hurt by market forces they cannot control.

Many people who retired in the downturn WISH TO GOD they had a way to get those dollars back.  In many VA's, they could have via the guarantees.

I guess the real litmus test will be during the next major stock market downturn.    How many relationship will end?

In the 100 or so wrap accounts i've opened I only lost 1 client and that was when her son got her ear and made her go back to a CD.

Since I'm in the bank channel most of my clients are conservative by nature and i've mostly allocated them to cash and bonds while maintanining only about half equities in mostly blue chips stock funds.....a little bit in midcaps, smallcaps and international.

For those who fear loss of principal i'd rather put them in some kind of principal preservation strategy of maybe 60% cash, 20% bonds and 20% stocks.       I really don't see how they can lose principal in any year doing that allocation and they will probably average a 4.5-5% return annually.

Since I'm not "tieing" any money up for my clients I guess liquidity can work against me too.

Thanks to everyone for all the feedback.

scrim

[quote=BankFC]

Scrim,

I'm afraid that maybe you do live in a vacuum a little bit when it comes to understanding clients needs.

First of all, regarding understanding of product (both you and the client) I really feel that...

#1 you haven't taken the time to TRY to understand the aspects of GMIB VA's.  They aren't that hard to understand.  Instead of posting random questions about them on the board, why don't you call the sales desk at one of the aforementioned companies and learn about them, then make AN EDUCATED DECISION.

The GMIB is a good recent addition to the guarantees in VAs. Ask your wholesaler to explain it to you.  I'm sure he will be more than happy to and provide you with all kinds of sales materials.

#2  You completely disregarded my point, my MAIN point, about how using a VA can hedge a more equity allocated portfolio, and over time net much more than the VA fee anyway!!

#3  Do you really think a client understands "fully" how a mutual fund works?  What the administration costs are, what the trading costs are (these aren't disclosed, do YOU even know what they are?), How the securities are selected, etc.  I submit that if a client can, as you say, "fully" understand a mutual fund, they can "fully" understand a VA.  Disagree?

You seem to me to be a purist.  Someone who has unfallible faith in the long term returns of the market.  To a great extent so am I, otherwise why would I be in the business?

HOWEVER, what you must realize it isn't MARKET returns investors care about, its INVESTOR returns investors care about.  They want, they NEED (on an emotional level anyway), to feel safe that their retirement dollars (aka thier lifestyle) will not be hurt by market forces they cannot control.

Many people who retired in the downturn WISH TO GOD they had a way to get those dollars back.  In many VA's, they could have via the guarantees.

Exactly.  When the client has a guaranteed income either now or in the future, I find that we can be more aggressive with the portfolio within the annuity and most often beat the guarantee.  The parts of their portfolio outside of the annuity we can then be more careful with to suit the clients real risk tolerance. 

Those clients who lost big, and are still trying to recover, from the market downturn in 2000, really appreciate the safety net and are willing to pay the extra for that safe feeling that the guarantees can provide.

Contrary to what some people think in other threads I am NOT anti VA. I use them all the time.  I am anti deceptive sales practices and inappropriate usage of VAs, fixed annuities and any other product, mutual funds etc.   When the broker puts his needs before the client and sells a high "commish" product, this ultimately comes back to bite us all in the a@@.   These practices are why our industry has a bad name, and why our E&O insurance goes up so much. Also why we have so much more regulatory scrutiny and paperwork  [/quote]

I really should call my wholesaler.

So you are saying to get an guaranteed income for life they don't have to annuitize and give up control?

The monthly payments can rise and fall too?

I will check that out.

scrim

"So you are saying to get an guaranteed income for life they don't have to annuitize and give up control?"

Scrim, that question shows that you really don't understand some of the basics of annuities.  I don't say that to be negative.  It is very important that you understand how these products work.  Call your wholesaler and also read the actual contracts.  You need to learn so that you know when to steer your clients towards these products when appropriate and away at other times.

Your lack of understanding can harm your clients.

I am calling them right now.

I always thought (perhaps mistakenly) to get a payment stream for life  you give up control of the assets when you annuitize.

scrim

They explained it to me and I get it better now.

The 6% gmib has really nothing to do with a 6% total return annually.

it's apples and oranges.

I might need to wear more hats and bring VA's into my practice but only when I fully understand the product.

Thanks all!

scrim

For those of you who don’t understand GMIB, GMWB, etc.  check out allstates true return, hard to argue with that feature.  They guarantee up to 250% increase in a lump sum.

Scrim,

That was a little like pulling teeth, but at least you are open-minded enough to look into learning about the things you were saying were bad without truly understanding them.

Have a great weekend!

Are most of you generalists or do you focus on a few main products?

Most of my practice is mutual fund managed money programs using asset allocation models.

The other part of my practice is mutual funds.

Perhaps I will present more insurance products and annuities in the future.

Since many of my clientele are middle aged and moderate income/assets LTC might be a good niche.

Has anyone had much success presenting LTC?

scrim

LTC is another much needed product.  I imagine that those who are against annuities due to the high cost and returns may be against LTC.  Do any of you say to the client that they don't need it and they can pay for it out of the high returns on their portfolio?

I have some clients that can't by the cream of the crop LTC so they at least get a little coverage.

"I imagine that those who are against annuities due to the high cost and returns may be against LTC. "

Wow, if there's ever been an example of an apples and oranges  comparison....

[quote=scrim67]Are most of you generalists or do you focus on a few main products?

Most of my practice is mutual fund managed money programs using asset allocation models.

The other part of my practice is mutual funds.

Perhaps I will present more insurance products and annuities in the future.

Since many of my clientele are middle aged and moderate income/assets LTC might be a good niche.

Has anyone had much success presenting LTC?

scrim[/quote]

I suspect that a lot of us offer a wide range of product but focus on a few favorites.  Mine happens to be fee-based accounts, direct mutual funds (for the small stuff) and variable annuities (for those afraid of the market).  I also tend to take less up-front commission and more annuitized commissions (hence fee-based, C-share mutuals and 4%/1% trail annuities).  When it comes to payout structure, I guess I am the anti-Dirk.

As far as LTC goes, I do a little of that too, but tend to focus on stuff like Lincoln's Moneyguard, which takes a lump sum and provides a nursing home benefit, but if not used, provides a death benefit to heirs.  A lot of folks prefer that method (if they can come up with the lump sum) since they know that one way or the other, the money will not be wasted...

"As far as LTC goes, I do a little of that too, but tend to focus on stuff like Lincoln's Moneyguard, which takes a lump sum and provides a nursing home benefit, but if not used, provides a death benefit to heirs.  A lot of folks prefer that method (if they can come up with the lump sum) since they know that one way or the other, the money will not be wasted..."

We had a wholesaler in here about 2 months ago touting this product.. Interesting... I like the feature that there are no surrender charges if the client wants to withdraw the principal....

Yeah…should have mentioned that also…if you decide you don’t want it, whenever, you can get your $$$ back for whatever reason.

How much of a benefit yrs certain?  Unlimited?  Can it vary daily or monthly?  Do they also cover in home nursing?  Adult day care?  Is there simple/compound increases?

[quote=mikebutler222]

"I imagine that those who are against annuities due to the high cost and returns may be against LTC. "

Wow, if there's ever been an example of an apples and oranges  comparison....

[/quote]

Meh, Annuities are sold to give a guarantee of some sort if annuitized/used for an M&E premium.  LTC gives a guarantee of some sort if used for a premium.  They are both insurance products one just more straightforward than the other. 

IMHO they have more similarities than an annuity vs. MF portfolio

but hey I'm just a simple person trying to increase my knowledge from a website full of professionals

[quote=TimBo]How much of a benefit yrs certain?  Unlimited?  Can it vary daily or monthly?  Do they also cover in home nursing?  Adult day care?  Is there simple/compound increases?[/quote]

I think it's 2.5% of the death benefit level for 40 months or something like that...I'm not at the office, so I'm not sure of my facts.  It doesn't vary or compound.  I don't think it covers ADC, but it may cover HHC...

Best bet is to call Lincoln and ask...if I sold more of this, I'd have all the specs memorized...sorry...

Funny thing is I had a older coupe come into my office that just bought 150k of the discussed investments and they “thought” they where getting a 6% return and their principal would remain untouched! WOW!!!

We all know that customers hear what they want to.  I had a client say that she requested the 20yr payout instead of 10.  Mind you this was only three weeks later.  I panicked and pulled her file.  She had circled 10yr and wrote it out in her own handwriting.  Since she had only one payout the company said they would change if she liked.   She apologized.  Now I want you to know that this woman was not only happy about the guaranteed payout but her CPA was also.  She has him watch what I do with her account and hasn’t been dissapointed.

Wow, finally a civilized thread on VA’s!!! Outstanding!!!

[quote=TimBo][quote=mikebutler222]

"I imagine that those who are against annuities due to the high cost and returns may be against LTC. "

Wow, if there's ever been an example of an apples and oranges  comparison....

[/quote]

Meh, Annuities are sold to give a guarantee of some sort if annuitized/used for an M&E premium.  LTC gives a guarantee of some sort if used for a premium.  They are both insurance products one just more straightforward than the other. 

[/quote]

The difference is it's hard to imagine an older person who won't be in need of LTC benefits at some point in their life. The vast majority will eventually be in a situation where that need is very real. The same can't be said of the "guarantee" in an annuity*.

* there’s no need to review whether the annuity “guarantee” is really needed or the if the buyer is simply harboring an irrational fear. We’ve beaten that horse well past dead.

I’ve own the AXA/Equitable Accumulator since early 2007.  I trust my financial advisor but because it’s still so unclear to me I’m hoping some “experts” on here might help.  Here’s the story…

I’d ask Frank Marino for his advice…

[quote=Blitzburgh]I’ve own the AXA/Equitable Accumulator since early 2007.  I trust my financial advisor but because it’s still so unclear to me I’m hoping some “experts” on here might help.  Here’s the story…

Humble apologies.  I googled for the "pros and cons" of AXA Equitable and it took me here.  I didn't see anything that defined this as a "professional only" website so I made my post.

[quote=Blitzburgh]

Humble apologies.  I googled for the “pros and cons” of AXA Equitable and it took me here.  I didn’t see anything that defined this as a “professional only” website so I made my post.

If we came to your job and asked you to review a competitors work for free, how would you respond?  Bottom line, your financial well being is a partnership between you and your FA.  Your part is to give your FA ALL pertinent information to your situation.  If your having an issue, and you are not telling your FA about it, he can’t fix it or do his job.

Blitzburgh,

[quote=rankstocks]

Blitzburgh,

Blitz, that’s not a second opinion.  That’s a takover pitch from a guy that would rather sell you a 30-year bond that you’ll mistakenly think is much shorter because he keeps telling you that “it’s callable in five years”.  It’s done all the time in my market by a couple of Edward Jones reps.  One sold a widow, who’s now my client, a 30-year CMO in 1996 for 99.75 and the same day, it priced on her statement below 94.  How much do you think HE made on that trade?  This kind of hypocracy annoys me.  There are plenty of reasons to own an annuity, and in a down market, they provide protections that rankstocks’ pet investments often do not.  By all means, ask questions until you understand what you have, but frankly, some of the questions above will only make you look stupid when you ask them.

[quote=Blitzburgh][quote=rankstocks]

Blitzburgh,

Blitzburgh, you have just been played.  Rankstocks just hit on every emotional hint you put in your original post and regurgitated (sp?) them back to you in the form of questions designed to sway you to his point of view (which may or may not be right for your situation).  Bottom line, do not take financial advice from an anonymous poster on a message board.  Go and talk to the advisor you trust.  I’m not a big fan of annuities, but what rankstocks posted did you a disservice so let me show you how easy this is.

[quote=Primo]Blitzburgh, you have just been played.  Rankstocks just hit on every emotional hint you put in your original post and regurgitated (sp?) them back to you in the form of questions designed to sway you to his point of view (which may or may not be right for your situation).  Bottom line, do not take financial advice from an anonymous poster on a message board.  Go and talk to the advisor you trust.  I’m not a big fan of annuities, but what rankstocks posted did you a disservice so let me show you how easy this is.

What's funny is that I've done over 2 million in VA's business the last 12 months, keep in mind that's about 10% of my new business.  I just don't find them appropriate very often.

[quote=rankstocks]

What's funny is that I've done over 2 million in VA's business the last 12 months, keep in mind that's about 10% of my new business.  I just don't find them appropriate very often.

[quote=rankstocks]

What’s funny is that I’ve done over 2 million in VA’s business the last 12 months, keep in mind that’s about 10% of my new business.  I just don’t find them appropriate very often.

As I have mentioned before, annuities have their place…although rarely.   You will see a lot of venom directed my way for stating truths about the subject, but put me up against anyone selling an annuity (and this has happened a lot over the years) and I will always come out on top.

AXA GMIB is good for clients who need to take income now, but if you have a 55 year old who will wait to 65 to take income, i think Prudential is hard to beat.

[quote=the word]AXA GMIB is good for clients who need to take income now, but if you have a 55 year old who will wait to 65 to take income, i think Prudential is hard to beat.

Yes, Prudential bought American SKandia.  I use the 8 year product b/c the M&E is lower 1.25 compared to 1.65 on the four year product.  And after year 8 the M&E goes to .65.  It pays 7% up front.  The 4 year pays 5.5%.