Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-29-2008, 02:45 PM   #181
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
I did not mean to imply that you said no insurer failed. If you poke around about Executive Life you will see that it took years for payouts and policy holders and annuity holders were not all made whole.
I believe each State has its own separate rules regarding the handling of failed insurance. I'd be happy to read any info you may find that states some weren't made whole. I'd like the info to present to some who have told me otherwise.
__________________

__________________
Art G is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 10-29-2008, 02:57 PM   #182
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
I believe each State has its own separate rules regarding the handling of failed insurance. I'd be happy to read any info you may find that states some weren't made whole. I'd like the info to present to some who have told me otherwise.

California State Auditor - Report 2005-115.2 Summary

In August 2005 the department estimated policyholder losses at $936 million, which equates to policyholders recovering 90 percent of their original policy rights. Including factors not considered by the department, we estimated policyholder economic losses of $3.1 billion as of August 2005, with policyholders recovering 86 percent of their expected ELIC account values.
__________________

__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 03:11 PM   #183
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
California State Auditor - Report 2005-115.2 Summary

In August 2005 the department estimated policyholder losses at $936 million, which equates to policyholders recovering 90 percent of their original policy rights. Including factors not considered by the department, we estimated policyholder economic losses of $3.1 billion as of August 2005, with policyholders recovering 86 percent of their expected ELIC account values.
Well thanks for finding that. I just read through it and if I'm understanding it right, all the money was covered by reinsurance, although, they argue over the time value of the money. And it discusses only life insurance policies and there's no mention of annuities.
I have printed out the article and I will look into it further though.
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 03:24 PM   #184
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
Well, right from the horses mouth.....
Hey, Suze is no horse. She is a gentle breeze of Long Island, available without the need to travel. May she live long and prosper.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline  
Old 10-29-2008, 04:20 PM   #185
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
Well thanks for finding that. I just read through it and if I'm understanding it right, all the money was covered by reinsurance, although, they argue over the time value of the money. And it discusses only life insurance policies and there's no mention of annuities.
I have printed out the article and I will look into it further though.
CuppaJoe can tell you more about how the annuity holders were treated. IIRC, the annuity contracts were sold and then there were problems with the buyer and the contract holders had a hard time getting money. I also think that the large annuity holders did not get paid in full. I do know that the state guaranty funds for annuities have dollar limits, usually around $100,000. When evaluating risk a person should know that dollar limit.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 08:21 AM   #186
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Well it looks like California is the one state where it's not all guaranteed....

State Guarantee Funds
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 08:31 AM   #187
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
Well it looks like California is the one state where it's not all guaranteed....

State Guarantee Funds
Thanks for the chart. I see California is the only one to have a percentage limit on top of a dollar limit. The rest of the listed states have a dollar limit as I mentioned above.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 08:38 AM   #188
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Yes you did, and the limits shock me. I need to research this further and see exactly what the limitations mean.
__________________
Art G is offline  
Scott Burns and Living Benefits
Old 10-30-2008, 09:40 AM   #189
Moderator Emeritus
Rich_by_the_Bay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 8,827
Scott Burns and Living Benefits

Scott Burns on variable annuities. This is the most lucid explanation I've run across as to how the money flows, and why he is not in favor of them:

The problem with living benefits
__________________
Rich
San Francisco Area
ESR'd March 2010. FIRE'd January 2011.

As if you didn't know..If the above message contains medical content, it's NOT intended as advice, and may not be accurate, applicable or sufficient. Don't rely on it for any purpose. Consult your own doctor for all medical advice.
Rich_by_the_Bay is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 11:48 AM   #190
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Well thank you Scott Burns, just two flaws I saw immediately....
1. If you die tomorrow, that immediate annuity is gone
2. That 10 year growth rate is wrong as every company I know of, doubles your income based amount after 10 years at most. So you're working with $200k, not $162k.

Then of course there's that CD like fixed income product he mentions paying 5%. He neglected to mention the loss of opportunity for it to grow to a much higher rate. So he's comparing a best case scenario to worst case with the VA.
Oh yeah, not to mention the loss of opportunity of quarterly lock in values.
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 12:28 PM   #191
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
Well thank you Scott Burns, just two flaws I saw immediately....
1. If you die tomorrow, that immediate annuity is gone
2. That 10 year growth rate is wrong as every company I know of, doubles your income based amount after 10 years at most. So you're working with $200k, not $162k.

Then of course there's that CD like fixed income product he mentions paying 5%. He neglected to mention the loss of opportunity for it to grow to a much higher rate. So he's comparing a best case scenario to worst case with the VA.
Oh yeah, not to mention the loss of opportunity of quarterly lock in values.
Are you going to write him and ask him to defend his position? Maybe Moshe should write him and ask him to defend his position..........
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 01:33 PM   #192
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Already did.

The problem with living benefits
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 01:42 PM   #193
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post



$20 bucks says he doesn't answer back.........
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 02:25 PM   #194
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
He did once before on his site. He admitted that American Funds were a fair inexpensive fund family. He does feel the need to defend himself on his home turf.
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 03:59 PM   #195
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinanceDude View Post


$20 bucks says he doesn't answer back.........
I've actually had a fair number of exchanges with Scott. He's written some things I disagreed with and some where I wanted clarification.

What Art better watch out for is that Scott has taken letters in the past from financial planners/annuity salespeople and published then in a column. He then devoted the rest of the column to why these people are uninformed about their own product or lying.
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 09:48 AM   #196
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
LOL! Not the first time I've taken on Scott. Let him take a shot at responding. It might be educational for all. It's very easy to take a worst case from here and another one from there and paint a pretty bleak picture.
Look at it this way, with many of you around here taking shots at VA's, the only real objection just keeps coming back to "cause we heard they were bad". No one has come up with a substantiated reason as to why they're a worse place to be right now than mutual funds.
__________________
Art G is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 10:51 AM   #197
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2B View Post
I've actually had a fair number of exchanges with Scott. He's written some things I disagreed with and some where I wanted clarification.

What Art better watch out for is that Scott has taken letters in the past from financial planners/annuity salespeople and published then in a column. He then devoted the rest of the column to why these people are uninformed about their own product or lying.
I'll bet he's doing a LOT less of that now that he is an advisor, someone could point out the fallacy of being an advisor and telling everyone how THEY are lying, but NOT him...........
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline  
Old 11-01-2008, 01:05 PM   #198
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinanceDude View Post
I'll bet he's doing a LOT less of that now that he is an advisor, someone could point out the fallacy of being an advisor and telling everyone how THEY are lying, but NOT him...........
I'm not interested in paying their fees to put my money into their version of index funds. I know Scott is a part owner in the firm but I don't know if he is one of the "advisors." His columns have been scrupulously clean as far as endorsing them or their products. He has continued to write about and openly endorse several DIY couch potato approaches. I haven't seen the slightest hint of Scott openly going over to the "other side" as far as his columns and books are concerned.

Heck, given the right circumstances, I might even become a FA.

I have seen several articles on Asset Builder by the "active" manager that uses Scott's articles to bolster their claims.

Asset Builder came out with the "new and improved" asset allocator with a new commodity based index fund. They showed how that if an investor had used this fund for 5% of their assets they would be so much better off earlier in the year. Of course, the fund wasn't available until about the first of the year when the commodity boom was well underway. It was a classic case of data mining to re-caracterize their investment returns to look better than anyone would have gotten following their prior advice.
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline  
Old 11-01-2008, 11:41 PM   #199
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2B View Post
I'm not interested in paying their fees to put my money into their version of index funds. I know Scott is a part owner in the firm but I don't know if he is one of the "advisors." His columns have been scrupulously clean as far as endorsing them or their products. He has continued to write about and openly endorse several DIY couch potato approaches. I haven't seen the slightest hint of Scott openly going over to the "other side" as far as his columns and books are concerned.
Fora someone as anal as you, your above paragraph surprises me. So, as long as he collects big fees from investors he remains "clean"?

Quote:
Asset Builder came out with the "new and improved" asset allocator with a new commodity based index fund. They showed how that if an investor had used this fund for 5% of their assets they would be so much better off earlier in the year. Of course, the fund wasn't available until about the first of the year when the commodity boom was well underway. It was a classic case of data mining to re-caracterize their investment returns to look better than anyone would have gotten following their prior advice.
And you still trust Scot Burns...amazing!!
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline  
Old 11-02-2008, 05:30 AM   #200
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinanceDude View Post
Fora someone as anal as you, your above paragraph surprises me. So, as long as he collects big fees from investors he remains "clean"?



And you still trust Scot Burns...amazing!!
He's upfront with his part ownership in the firm. He doesn't use his forum to generate business. I'm sure some people are swayed by his stature and will use their services. I do find it somewhat amusing that a major champion of DIY investing for several decades would get involved with an FA firm.

The commodities fund came in from their "parent," DFA. The firm just markets these specially crafted index funds. That's just part of their responsibilities as franchisees.

I don't intend to let them manage my money. I see nothing different in the approach Scott has taken in his articles. I don't agree with everything he says all of the time but I recommend his archive of Couch Potato articles to any potential converts to DIY investing.
__________________

__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Variable Annuities Are the Way to Go!!!!! 2B FIRE and Money 35 09-21-2007 12:24 PM
Variable Annuities? Worth it? Breitling Young Dreamers 17 04-23-2007 11:28 AM
Could Variable Annuities be too cheap? saluki9 FIRE and Money 19 01-12-2007 08:01 PM
Variable Annuities Craig FIRE and Money 8 01-13-2005 05:27 PM
Annuities-Variable? Fixed? Immediate jackalope FIRE and Money 6 10-01-2003 05:36 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:30 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.