Whenever we price a purchase of any kind, we make a decision about its relative value. Then we buy or don’t buy at that price.
The reasons behind that decision will either be the direct value of that item e.g. a heater that will warm us in this cold weather; or the indirect value of the purchase e.g. keeping up with the neighbour's giant plasma TV (even if that purchase ends up being useful, it was driven more by ego value).
The ‘fairness’ of the price is a reflection of that value.
When considering the ‘price’ of insurance solutions that we propose to our client's, we aim to ensure that we draw their attention to a clear relative value of the purchase.
We now run a well-structured package of products that should pretty much replace the family’s current income in most circumstances. So if the total premium for that package is say, 4% of your current household income, would that not be seen as value?
Further, while we often hear people say they 'can not afford' insurance, we ask ourselves, how they would meet their living needs if they weren't receiving an income?
Did you find this post interesting or helpful?
Can you spare 2 minutes to comment, or share it with someone.
I'll even get you started.
The thing I liked/disliked about this post was
No comments:
Post a Comment