Insurance Business forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Insurance Business | 08 Jun 2017, 11:06 AM Agree 0
Two radically different views about the future of the broker are expressed at an industry event
  • Andrew | 08 Jun 2017, 12:12 PM Agree 0
    the independent broker will survive and thrive. They will evolve and continue to grow market share but will need to be nimble and flexible in their approach. Those who cannot utilize technology and gain efficiencies in their business will struggle to grow and remain viable, but those that do will be fine. What is perplexing to me is the doom and gloom that people forecast about this industry rather than focus on the growth opportunities are before us. Yes consolidation will continue, but the broker channel will remain strong and vibrant but as all industries, evolve.
  • Andrew Tablotney | 08 Jun 2017, 12:56 PM Agree 0
    The sky is falling, the sky is falling. I have been hearing about the demise of the broker for 20 plus years. We've had challenges throughout time and we learn to adapt or die.Maybe Ali has a vested interest as he wants brokers to sign up with his company and pay him royalties.
  • Marsha Jones Dooley | 08 Jun 2017, 01:07 PM Agree 0
    As a small independent broker office I believe there is a strong place for us in the future. Many client do not want to do business with a call centre nor go through the process online themselves. They want to talk to a person, the same person every time from setting up their policy and servicing their policy. They want consistent ability to question and have discussions with an accountable known entity.

    The threat for all brokers in my opinion is the appetite of the large Insurers wanting to off set the balance of their pricing for brokers to the advantage of their direct rates. Brokers need to feed the markets that support the broker system, to continue doing business with their markets that directly compete with them is potential suicide.
  • the future | 08 Jun 2017, 02:56 PM Agree 0
    The threat to brokers is not other brokers or insurers going direct, it's massive disruption from the outside. Apple and Google collect more than enough data to be able to accurately quote personal lines and likely small business and probably auto. They also both have enough capital in cash to put up reserves and be their own insurance company. This would cut out exisiting brokers AND exisiting insurers.

    Provinces with Gov't auto will finally go direct and cut out a lot of the traditional walk in business for small brokers.

    Brokers even small ones will be creating their own MGAs to be more vertically integrated. Why live on 10% when you can take teh full 20-35%?

    Far more automation using technology mean far less people required. Open market marketing will be reserved for the large multi million dollar placements and large international placements.

    Companies such as Intact and Aviva will shed 50% of their staff in the next 5 years.
  • Greg S | 08 Jun 2017, 03:10 PM Agree 0
    If RIBO, IBAO, FSCO, OSFI, IBABC, CCIR-CCRRA, OCA or any of the other supposed gatekeepers in the Canadian insurance business actually stood up for the consumer and took an aggressive stance on transparency and forced the 'big brokers', the insurance companies, the MGAs and the Associations to be fully transparent on investment, ownership, unique debt or other financing, in or by insurance companies or insurance conglomerates, and forced every industry player to adopted a unified definition of 'independent', and disclose all revenue (expense reductions) sources, and disclose all potential conflicts of interest to their clients and their prospective clients, and to the regulators, and to the public at large, there would be absolutely no concerns about the demise of the small independent insurance broker. Small independent insurance brokers are surviving and some even thriving, despite unfair competition from supposed 'brokers' who have massive undisclosed conflicts of interest which are driving their business practices far more than the best interests of the insurance buying public.
  • Jay | 08 Jun 2017, 03:44 PM Agree 0
    They have got to survive.
    The lack of interest,service and compassion in bigger institutions will only grow. And the client will suffer from it.

    Let's face it. The only goal in the larger cabinet is to acquire as many smaller ones as they can so as to sell there cabinet with a bigger profit. That’s it!!

    In the last 13 months we went from The Groupe C.M.A. to Groupe Horizon. Just as we started to breathe from calling all of our clients.
    (Yes CALLING not mailing texting, face timing. For the big boys that is called SERVICE... I know you are dumbfounded by the word so I added the definition for you guys.
    The action of helping or doing work for someone:
    Just to make sure here are a couple of synonyms: Favor, kindness, good turn, helping hand, assistance)

    Then BANG Groupe Horizon sold to Great West Life. Was nice to learn of this in newspaper. Where did I see this before? Oh yes... President Trump with FBI director James Comey.

    And why should they advise the broker? After all, they only bring clients... And what about the brokers share in transaction HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
    When will we grow a pair and sue them for to get our due???
  • anonymous | 18 Jun 2017, 04:26 PM Agree 0
    To top it off, I don't see anyone talking about the whole other challenge in the broker world. On top of the filed rules of the insurance companies, brokerages now have added their own set of rules. Either under pressure of the insurance company to protect their contracts (if they had high claims ratio) or earn contingency bonus or just seeking "desirable clients". Due to this, I had to scare away atleast 40% of my customers and technically speaking, I am sending them to either other brokerages or direct writers. Some of these "guidelines" makes no sense at all.

    I think we as brokers are contributing to this fact and making it hard for ourselves.
Post a reply