Scott Witt wrote to introduce himself. He is an actuary and fee-only advisor based in the Milwaukee area. Witt worked in the actuarial department of Northwestern Mutual for more than ten years, "so I am intimately familiar with the inner workings of the insurance industry." He also worked with Peter Katt, an independent consultant, for a couple of years.

"I thought you might be interested in a recent demonstration I did that involved a prominent no-load policy used by many financial advisors. I have no vested interest in the decisions my clients make, but it is interesting to note how poorly the no-load product fares in this particular analysis." Yes. And that is a topic for another column. No doubt some agents will jump on that analysis as a reason to stick with what we've got: high-commission products.

But that makes no sense. What it says instead is that there's lots more work to be done on transparency in life insurance products. We can celebrate that the work has at least begun.

Another person who wrote to me, Michael C. Valdez, is a principal with Business Exit Planners in Tampa, Fla., a firm that, among other things, designs road maps for business owners who need exit strategies. As part of the strategies, he uses key-person insurance, as well as coverage for estate planning and charitable giving needs, and the company encourages each client to choose where to have the plan implemented. He operates with a CPA, an attorney and a clinical psychologist (who is also a CPA, CLU, and a registered employee benefits consultant).

I also received this note: "Your article was very timely for our fee-only wealth management firm," wrote Ron Rhoades, director of research and chief compliance officer for Joseph Capital Management LLC in Hernando, Fla., "as we are re-exploring the life insurance marketplace with a view to recommending life insurance (but, to avoid conflicts of interest, not selling any products). I am aware that life insurance agents will likely pummel you with hate mail and call you all kinds of names."

Rhoades also says that life insurance agents don't want to understand that most life insurance issues could be solved if clients bought a term policy of 20 years, more or less, depending on the needs, and then converted it to a permanent form of insurance at some later time. His firm has a saying regarding salespeople who sell VAs, EIAs and "other highly expensive products (with no consideration of tax consequences, fees and costs, etc.)"-either they "Just don't know," or "They just don't care."

Finally, Rhoades sums up, in a much more elegant manner than I could have done:

"Disintermediation is a powerful force, and if we can get the SEC to stop interfering in the process (such as their past effort to negate fiduciary duties in fee-based brokerage accounts), the world will continue to evolve to a 'purchaser's representative' fiduciary and advisory model, not a 'manufacturer's representative' product sales model." I say: Bravo! And he concludes: "Thank you for your continued writings, which promote just such a future." And thank you, Mr. Rhoades.

I also received a couple of e-mails from people who asked to talk about these issues privately and not for publication. Interesting, isn't it? One surprise e-mail came from Gay Yellen, who along with her husband Don Reiser ran the marketing arm of Ameritas Life with such enthusiasm for many years. Reiser came across the August column on insurance in Financial Advisor, and they wanted to touch base and update me on their retirement, which they are very much enjoying.

Yellen just finished writing a novel. Reiser divides his time between charity work, photography and consulting. So I wonder what Reiser thinks of recent developments in the insurance industry after spending so many years pushing for greater transparency and lower expenses. And, of course, I wonder what the rest of you think as well.