hello clients, prospective clients, and business alliance members. you probably hear much about succession planning and blueprinting your exit strategy. keep listening because it always remains a wise investment.
in mendez & co. financial counselors, we have begun a collegiate + custom-tailored internship program. the collegiate definition gives away the idea, but how many college internships can you consider customizable? our internships have a hand in their own development from day one, destroying command and control business ethos.
we discuss our psychological profile. our current intern, ilia dolaptchiev, has a general jungian typology istj, the examiner, but my typology revolves around enfp, the visionary. we balance our strategic and tactical activities with our complimentary, natural psychological profiles.
...and yes, it takes patience and hard work on both sides.
psychological matches will become more difficult as our independent practice builds upon its human capital; however, instituting consistent practices with our collective ethos will ensure sustainable organizational development, value creation, and impact opportunities.
our internship program fits directly into boosting our overall independent practice enterprise value. our human capital investment serves as a foundational piece with our efficient fee-based consultative revenue model. combining the two processes creates significant synergy and value.
consultative fees remain our target revenue source since the client acquisition process involves deeper human relationships on trust and confidence. focusing on obtaining retainer based fee income creates a deeper client bond, in my professional opinion, relative to transactional income. transactional income can create unusual behavior and reputation losses because participants can place profits over multi-generational human relationships.
we could argue about the revenue model all day, but without question, our clients like it and have begun to expect it. our model allows easier cash flow present value calculations to vet out enterprise value. building multi-generational human relationships requires judicious, consistent care.
earning planning certifications and additional licensure would create additional cash flow opportunities, where otherwise not billable; moreover, valuation will help an additional principal value his stake and purchase ownership interests.
as the business model evolves, its revenue model will maintain a balanced mix of fixed and variable revenue sources. the business model choice though will maintain human capital by focusing on people, planet, and profits. profits come last.
you cannot ignore profit but why compromise enduring value with unsustainable shortcuts? your collective mental profit will drive the process behind blueprinting your exit strategy, envisioning your legacy, and your designing your pension. unscrupulous means do not justify noble ends.
both eastern and western histories have shown that a short-sighted profit agenda results in shorter civilization shelf-life. we must measure our progress against our collective history over the last 10,000 years, when we began gathering around fresh water fertility. our current human civilizations remain on a collision course with fresh water depletion, population growth, and personal vanity.
looking at the hardworking medieval merchant class serves as fantastic proxy. during the 1500's, the world endured rapid technological change, chaotic social upheaval, and massive killings through disease and war. we remain on the cusp of something fantastic and absolutely so fulfilling, but only with a similar multi-generational legacy approach.
when you can work alongside your own employee partners and tap together your collective mind, you create human capital energy. well-honed, creative, independent-minded energy remains elusive, intangible, and always for sale. its implicit value far exceeds resource and financial capital due to infinitely valuable options.
our independent exit strategy + legacy + pension practice instructs our collegiate interns to maintain the following core principles:
a) social entrepreneurship
we operate our consultative practice with an independent mindset imbued with social entrepreneurship. if you have never heard of the concept or need more insight, check out this foundation's website:
http://www.skollfoundation.org/approach/
our organization does not financially support or receive any compensation from this foundation or the linked website's legal owners. they have a good idea though.
b) mobile entrepreneurship
our independent mindset embraces mobile entrepreneurship. our rapidly evolving business environment with nimble technology applications facilitates international commerce on a scale not seen for many, many years. we can balance people, planet, and yes, profits this time around.
locking yourself into one geographic or linguistic environ confines your business enterprise impact and your mindset. a prior recorded thought nails the concept well:
http://menco-finco.blogspot.com/2012/03/truly-global-client-experience.html
c) decentralized structure
my prior experience prevents me from practicing command and control military governance over business affairs. we have daily 360 degree reviews between principal and intern, and yes, sometimes you hear things that you would rather avoid. a nimble player keeps positive energy and dialogue going, achieving breakthroughs not dreamed up yet.
interns can earn up to 10% on new retainers without any additional servicing or clawbacks. we mutually agree on the bonus rate during internship since it remains a practice line item off the top. our focus remains consultative driven with a multi-generational approach.
nimble human capital management requires quick action and deep preparation. we do not allocate our human + financial capital resources to positions not involved in revenue generation. why create a bureaucratic organization with cronies, goombas, and rude free loaders?
thank you ilia dolaptchiev for your ambition, your efficiency, your courtesy, and most importantly, putting up with my boundless personality.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Friday, June 1, 2012
long term care misinformation from npr
hello clients, prospective clients, and business alliance members. scanning legitimate and worthwhile email blasts periodically yields valuable information; however, you may occasionally find blasts from credible sources that provide misinformation upon further research.
national public radio (npr) recently published a piece on may 8, 2012, called, "long-term-care insurance: who needs it?" the author, marilyn geewax, rhetorically asks an ironic question, and ultimately, lets down her target readers with misinformation. she has perpetuated common myths about private long term care insurance, scaring away target readers who have the most to lose.
npr's target listening and viewing demographic includes the following attributes, according to its 2009 national audience insight and research:
her readership group stands to benefit most from private long term care insurance and has the most to lose considering its relative affluence; moreover, longer lifespans for those sandwich generation members around age 45 will more than likely exceed the age 65 cohort. so, why misinform your readership about a critically vital topic facing massive uninsured healthcare expenses from longevity and aging?
the following excerpts highlight misinformation:
a) long term care insurance costs too much
ms. geewax diligently provides sample premium based policy information with standard options, such as benefit pool, health rating, age, etc. premium based policies generally fit individuals who invest in coverage at an early age and have consistently strong cash flow; however, consumers can choose annuity or life insurance based long term care, not just premium based, solutions.
unfortunately, she misses two highly critical long term care solutions that offer consumers valuable choices. you can explore learning more about long term care combination solutions here:
http://www.lifehealthpro.com/2010/01/25/the-pension-protection-act-and-long-term-care-insu
her readership would stand to benefit from knowing this information, rather than thinking that all solutions revolve around premium based policies; moreover, you do not have use or lose your long term care benefits with a long term care combination solution. your unused benefits remain wrapped up in a financial instrument with residual cash value, creating future legacy or pension opportunities.
b) long term care insurance is cheaper when you sign up by age 60
her statement clearly does not make sense since most insurance carriers will begin considering consumers around age 40. why put off the decision when you should begin considering it much earlier in your retirement planning years? consumers will obtain more favorable benefits when younger and healthier rather than seeking out coverage when approaching peak claim years.
an individual approaching age 60 should consider supplementing existing coverage with a combination solution, rather than a premium based solution; conversely, you should consider a premium based solution much earlier than age 60. your combination solutions work when you can reallocate your savings with larger single premium investments.
how can she discuss the age question intelligently when she does not consider long term care combination solutions?
c) long term care insurance covers various disabilities
long term care insurance carriers will pay claims generally based on cognitive or physical impairment. ms. geewax did not even bother to address the physical impairment by its correct name, your assisted daily living (adl) activities. your adl activities include bathing, continence, dressing, eating, toileting, and transferring.
you must generally have cognitive impairment or an inability to manage two out of six adl activities to receive benefits. most carriers will not pay benefits without meeting that criteria, and they do not call the adl activities definition, "various disabilities."
you can explore learning more about your adl activities here:
http://www.seniorhomes.com/p/activities-of-daily-living/
d) long term care policies are capped off at three years
once again, her position remains incorrect. insurance carriers will provide you with lifetime benefits, provided that you pay additional periodic or single premiums.
for instance, a client had an option to purchase lifetime coverage through a single premium life insurance policy. her proposed 82,000 single life insurance premium would provide 3,426 per month for 50 months; however, an additional upfront 5,000 premium would continue benefits beyond 4 years indefinitely, managing an unusually long stay.
not too bad for an 87,000 investment, far exceeding the "standard" three years!
npr should have considered the entire long term care insurance spectrum, rather than perpetuating stale myths. its target market deserves better editorial financial advice.
...special thank you to ilia dolaptchiev, our summer intern, for proofing and criticizing this critical piece. he definitely earned his keep today!
national public radio (npr) recently published a piece on may 8, 2012, called, "long-term-care insurance: who needs it?" the author, marilyn geewax, rhetorically asks an ironic question, and ultimately, lets down her target readers with misinformation. she has perpetuated common myths about private long term care insurance, scaring away target readers who have the most to lose.
npr's target listening and viewing demographic includes the following attributes, according to its 2009 national audience insight and research:
- the median age hovers around age 50
- the median household income exceeds 80,000, well above the national average of 55,000
- 65% of listeners have a bachelor's degree, compared to the national average of 25%
- listeners are three times more likely to hold a graduate degree
her readership group stands to benefit most from private long term care insurance and has the most to lose considering its relative affluence; moreover, longer lifespans for those sandwich generation members around age 45 will more than likely exceed the age 65 cohort. so, why misinform your readership about a critically vital topic facing massive uninsured healthcare expenses from longevity and aging?
the following excerpts highlight misinformation:
a) long term care insurance costs too much
ms. geewax diligently provides sample premium based policy information with standard options, such as benefit pool, health rating, age, etc. premium based policies generally fit individuals who invest in coverage at an early age and have consistently strong cash flow; however, consumers can choose annuity or life insurance based long term care, not just premium based, solutions.
unfortunately, she misses two highly critical long term care solutions that offer consumers valuable choices. you can explore learning more about long term care combination solutions here:
http://www.lifehealthpro.com/2010/01/25/the-pension-protection-act-and-long-term-care-insu
her readership would stand to benefit from knowing this information, rather than thinking that all solutions revolve around premium based policies; moreover, you do not have use or lose your long term care benefits with a long term care combination solution. your unused benefits remain wrapped up in a financial instrument with residual cash value, creating future legacy or pension opportunities.
b) long term care insurance is cheaper when you sign up by age 60
her statement clearly does not make sense since most insurance carriers will begin considering consumers around age 40. why put off the decision when you should begin considering it much earlier in your retirement planning years? consumers will obtain more favorable benefits when younger and healthier rather than seeking out coverage when approaching peak claim years.
an individual approaching age 60 should consider supplementing existing coverage with a combination solution, rather than a premium based solution; conversely, you should consider a premium based solution much earlier than age 60. your combination solutions work when you can reallocate your savings with larger single premium investments.
how can she discuss the age question intelligently when she does not consider long term care combination solutions?
c) long term care insurance covers various disabilities
long term care insurance carriers will pay claims generally based on cognitive or physical impairment. ms. geewax did not even bother to address the physical impairment by its correct name, your assisted daily living (adl) activities. your adl activities include bathing, continence, dressing, eating, toileting, and transferring.
you must generally have cognitive impairment or an inability to manage two out of six adl activities to receive benefits. most carriers will not pay benefits without meeting that criteria, and they do not call the adl activities definition, "various disabilities."
you can explore learning more about your adl activities here:
http://www.seniorhomes.com/p/activities-of-daily-living/
d) long term care policies are capped off at three years
once again, her position remains incorrect. insurance carriers will provide you with lifetime benefits, provided that you pay additional periodic or single premiums.
for instance, a client had an option to purchase lifetime coverage through a single premium life insurance policy. her proposed 82,000 single life insurance premium would provide 3,426 per month for 50 months; however, an additional upfront 5,000 premium would continue benefits beyond 4 years indefinitely, managing an unusually long stay.
not too bad for an 87,000 investment, far exceeding the "standard" three years!
npr should have considered the entire long term care insurance spectrum, rather than perpetuating stale myths. its target market deserves better editorial financial advice.
...special thank you to ilia dolaptchiev, our summer intern, for proofing and criticizing this critical piece. he definitely earned his keep today!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)