The Mighty Quinn - Revisited

Re: QL and the possibility of exit charges

The Equitable Life comparison is totally irrelevant.

Equitable offered with profits funds which are completely different from the unit linked funds offered by Quinn Life. And of course, Equitable has not introduced exit charges on its unit linked products.

Quinn Life is presumably losing money in its start up phase. But it just doesn't have the exposure which a general liability insurance company has. Bad underwriting by a company which controls 5% of the motor market can lead to serious losses. Quinn Life will probably be in a position for some years where its annual charges do not cover the admin costs. But it won't lose serious money i.e. enough to worry its owner.

Brendan
 
Re: QL and the possibility of exit charges

First of all I should state an interest. Most people will be familiar with my singing, acting and stripping roles. However, for my day job, I do earn a living from the the conventional life assurance industry; therefore I am <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> a priori<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> an "enemy" of QL. Now it seems to me that QL has more enemies than policyholders and with this posting probably more AAM contributions today than new clients. :b

However, let's be fair. The theoretical position is probably that QL <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START-->cannot<!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--> impose an exit charge but can do anything it likes on fund management charges. For example, it could impose a one off 10% fund management charge "in the interests of all policyholders"

But that is unlikely.

If, as seems more likely, the QL experiment fails it will probably be sold off to, say, Irish Life. They will of course immediately impose their standard rip-off charges.

But, in all lilelihood, the authorities will not allow IL to make a back-dated charge.

In summary, anyone embarking today on the QL low charge experiment will probably enjoy those benefits for as long as they last, but will probably in the end of the day finish off paying conventional charges.

Fellow conventionals should drop this obsession with QL, they are a non-event. :rolleyes
 
Re: QL and the possibility of exit charges

Brendan says:

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> The Equitable Life comparison is totally irrelevant.<!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->

That's fine. But if people are deciding to invest with them (QL)SOLELY on the basis of their current charging structure, it's not unreasonable to ask what guarantees they have against future changes to this structure.

tedd
 
non-event

Agree with your observation - however the proverbial 'man from Mars' logging on to AAM (or reading Brendan's book) would think they were a major force !!
 
Future charges

Other than any contractural guarantees I don't see any obvious way in which future changes in charges can be predicted - whether it be in relation QL <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> or anybody else<!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->. Madonna seems to be suggesting that it could be a case of "make hay while the sun shines" (in terms of low charges) with QL for the moment until they inevitably get bought out or increase their charges to "conventional levels". However she also asserts that QL are a "non-event". These two opinions seem to me to be contradictory! Why should low charges - even if it was only for a few years be considered a non-event?

While we're at it, do people think that EBS Summit Funds will also eventually impose "conventional" charges at some point in the future or is this simply a QL bashing exercise? :rolleyes
 
Re: Non Event

I gave up chasing this ghost a while back.

I think what Madonna means by 'non-event' is that there are a plethora of one man/woman brokers out there that are 'writing' the same amount of business that QL did in year one (without their overheads).

Perhaps I'm wrong. But then, she can <!--EZCODE BOLD START--> correct<!--EZCODE BOLD END--> me. Yum Yum!!
 
Question for Madonna

Madonna,

Having felt free to tag my company as indulging in "standard rip-off charges", perhaps you'd care to identify which of the conventional life insurance firms, or which branch of the industry, you work in so that we may reciprocate ?
 
Re: Answer from Madonna

Ah now, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> Irish Lifer<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> don't take it personal.;)

Note the word <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> <!--EZCODE BOLD START--> "standard"<!--EZCODE BOLD END--><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->. Couldn't this mean standard to the <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START-->industry<!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--> rather than standard to <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START-->Irish Life<!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END-->? unless the cap fits of course. :rolleyes

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> CM<!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, I meant <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START-->QL<!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--> are a non event, as <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> Freddie (naughty boy!)<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> pointed out. Their product is clearly superior (while it lasts) but so few are availing of it, why oh why can a thread like this and many others keep going on and on?

I want to suggest a moratorium. No more mention of QL until April 1st 2002 (applies only to regulars of course and in any case the chances of anyone from the general public actually mentioning them are remote.) :b
 
Re: Madonna's Moratorium

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> I want to suggest a moratorium. No more mention of QL until April 1st 2002 (applies only to regulars of course and in any case the chances of anyone from the general public actually mentioning them are remote.) <!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->

QL are one of the very few brands/companies recommended by this site. The book says that the AAM site will provide "the most up to date" information. It's only fair that people are free to comment on developments which may (or may not) be relevant to this company's favoured status.
 
Be careful watch you wish for.

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> Editor's note: I have edited this posting as it seemed to refer to the failure of a company which hasn't failed<!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->

The failure of Quinn Life to make large inroads quickly probably has to do with the resistence to changing from face to face business in the ROI. The collapse of <!--EZCODE BOLD START--> finance2u.com ?<!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, costing the owner apparently over £1million is more of the same.

The second likely issue has been the equity downturn within a short period after the start up I'd guess. Equity managers throughout the world have seen a flight to guaranteed investments like GEDA's, and the like. So the Quinn target market as a whole shrank, even though they were chasing 3% of it from reports.

The third issue was unquestionably the brand. It's a lot different parting with a thousand pounds for motor insurance which is a price driven commoditised market for most people, and sticking ten times that into a privately owned life office. Nevertheless the was and still is a market for this type of business if you are prepared to stick with the development of the company long term. See below.

It is unwise to sneer at a genuine entrepreneurial step, and the entry of a new model to a shrinking market choice, increasingly controlled by three bankassurers. I suspect that Quinn Life will seek a big brand partner, but I'd be astonished if it came out of the local pack. That wouldn't be Sean Quinn's style.

Much more likely is that Quinn Life will be partnered or taken over by sizeable and serious external player, bent on building a pan European business. The Quinn operation, technology, license, and energy would be an attractive route to market, depending only on costs.

A lot of banking people sneered at ACC bank, and laughed loudly when the NIB, and then later the TSB ventures collapsed, happy to see the market dominated by the big players. Now they've got RaboBank, an infinitely better managed, and bigger fish right in the backyard, operating as a community bank.

Be careful watch you wish for, Quinn life may be a route to market for a big energetic low cost player, and much like the tens of thousands who bought an ACC SSIA, Quinn Life policyholders may yet have the last laugh. In the meantime they've nothing to lose as outlined earlier.
 
Sensitive Irish Lifer

If your're looking for examples of rip-off charges, compare your Euro Stoxx with QLD - identical performance but big difference in charges.
 
QL versus EuroStoxx performance

tedd - were you not around for ? The question initially posed is eventually discussed in after a bit of a digression into whether or not EBS still offer net funds. :rolleyes
 
Re: QL versus EuroStoxx performance

Hi CM,

It wasn't me that asked, it was Lark. And no, I'm not Lark.

tedd
 
Sensitive Irish Lifer

Madonna - your post specifically said "THEIR standard rip-off charges" so I don't think I was being over sensitive. Glad to hear you think our charges are in line with the industry generally.

Lark - the difference, as you probably know given that only insiders seem to comment on Quinn Life, is that IL pays commission to brokers whereas QLD does not. Maybe we even pay commission to Madonna, depending on exactly which branch of the industry she operates in. Our non-commission SSIA product, for example, recently was rated the best value other than the low-cost no-frills operators.

I have to say I get a bit fed up of the constant Irish Life bashing on this board. We may have our faults, but we are a successful, innovative, market-leading company, with more customers than anyone else in the market.
 
Apples and oranges

Irish Lifer,

Point accepted about comparing (rotten?) apples and (non commission-paying) oranges like Quinn Life.

So let's confine ourselves to comparing the products of broker offices only. Now your charges are much more in line with the competition - except your products aren't. The other offices actively manage your money, giving them some sort of an excuse for their premium charges. You've thrown in the towel and offer join-the-dots index tracking, but you've kept the premium charges. A neat trick or what?
 
Irish Life bashing

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--> Our non-commission SSIA product, for example, recently was rated the best value other than the low-cost no-frills operators.<!--EZCODE BOLD END-->

Sounds like not best value at all to me! Are EBS Summit Funds included in your "low-cost no-frills" category?

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--> I have to say I get a bit fed up of the constant Irish Life bashing on this board.<!--EZCODE BOLD END-->

I certainly hadn't noticed any trend of Irish Life bashing here and I have been on AAM since near enough its inception. If certain Irish Life products have high charges relative to other providers' products then any criticism is warranted in my view. If individuals have had bad (or good!) experiences of Irish Life and recount them here then that's their prerogative and part of what AAM is all about. Others are free to disagree and argue the case. However this is better done by arguing the facts rather than making claims of persecution which are unlikely to garner much sympathy around here.

:rolleyes
 
Irish Life Bashing

Responding to comments on this thread from before Xmas.

CM - yes, the survey showed our SSIA product non-commission to be more expensive than both Quinn Life and EBS .... but less expensive than Canada Life, Standard Life, Eagle Star, New Ireland, Friends First, Scottish Provident, and lots of other companies that don't seem to attract the same knee-jerk responses on AAM.

Lark - if, like most AAM posters, you're a believer in indexation strategies, surely you should be congratulating us for bringing index products to the Irish market, a major development. As to why we charge the same for it as others do for active management, well, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> as any fule kno<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> (as some book from my childhood used to say), the main costs of an investment policy are the seller's remuneration and the costs of administering it, which are the same whether it's actively or passively managed. Actual fund management charges are a very small portion of the total expenses.

While I'm posting, I saw Eddie Hobbs have a go at us in Sunday's <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> Business Post<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> about our property funds. Again, he very graciously mentioned Irish Life by name even though pretty much every property fund manager has responded to the current market conditions in the same way. If he were a direct owner of commercial property at this phase in the cycle, doesn't brainy Eddie think that (a) he might have to wait up to six months to sell, and (b) that there might be some uncertainty about the price he might get. Property just ain't like equities. Things must be different on Middle Earth ! And while I can't speak for other companies, our sales literature was absolutely clear on what might happen, including even our cooling off letters. So if Eddie didn't like the way the funds were structured, then he shouldn't have let clients invest in them.

Finally, I see the normally voluble Madonna hasn't responded to my invitation to tell us who she works for. Obviously not as keen to reveal herself as she has been in another thread ! A bad case of pots and kettles, perhaps ?
 
Irish Life bashing

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--> lots of other companies that don't seem to attract the same knee-jerk responses on AAM.<!--EZCODE BOLD END-->

Maybe you could provide some evidence of this alleged, and it seems by your implication persistent, "Irish Life bashing" and these "[Irish Life specific] knee-jerk resonses" on AAM?
 
Re: What kinda girl do you think I am, Irish Lifer?

Haven't I revealed quite enuff?

I find the following quote from one of <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> Irish Lifer's<!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> earlier threads revealing in its own right.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--> <!--EZCODE BOLD START--> "Glad to hear you think our charges are in line with the industry generally."<!--EZCODE BOLD END--><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->If that makes you "glad" does it not rather suggest that it must in fact be flattering the Irish Life position?:rolleyes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top