Saturday, December 4, 2010

Pats V Jets

Monday night the game of the season will be played. Final score Pats 30 Jets 27

GO PATS

Friday, November 26, 2010

IRA Rollovers

Today, the largest IRA rollovers in history are up for
grabs IMMEDIATELY! This is the best time to get your share
of this business by making yourself invaluable to consumers
who are URGENTLY searching for safety and security for
their retirement savings.

A number of advisors are now selling $200,000 - 400,000
IRA Rollovers using our new 3-Step Client Attraction System.

According to LIMRA 75% of Americans with IRA's are not aware
of the Roth opportunity.

This is your door opener to explain the new law.

Can you give me three good reasons why you
are not going after those $200,000 - $400,000 401 (k) and
IRA Rollovers in your area.

I didn't think so....

Had two phone calls last week from advisors and one in New
Jersey rolled a $650,000 IRA to a Roth and his commissions
were over $42,000. I told him that should pay for a bunch
of IRA holder lists and postcards for his area.

Another member from Florida rolled $250,000 in November
from a list of affluent widows and using part of our client
attraction system. Check it out...

Sunday, October 31, 2010

RBC - Wierd Times

RBC held an investor day on October 27th, 2010 in Canada. I’ve attached the CEO’s, Gord Nixon, presentation and those slides of his senior management.

The executive team made no mention in their prepared remarks regarding the sale of Liberty Life, or any long-term impacts through the reinsurance treaties with either Athene Life Re, Protective Life, or any longer term elements of the Apollo Global Management financed purchase of Liberty Life.

There is no formal mention of their U.S. business plan, the index annuity market, annuities in general, or the retirement savings business in the U.S.



Go Pats!

Monday, September 13, 2010

How To Understand $12 trillon in Debt

What the United States $12.3Trillion debts amounts to:

$40,065 per person living in USA

$770 a week for a year per person

$110 a day for a year per person


Barry Bulakites

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Monday, September 6, 2010

The 1.6% Recovery

To no one's surprise except perhaps Vice President Joe Biden's, second quarter economic growth was revised down yesterday to 1.6% from the prior estimate of 2.4%, which was down from first quarter growth of 3.7%, which was down from the 2009 fourth quarter's 5%. Economic recoveries are supposed to go in the other direction.


The downward revision was anticipated given the poor early economic reports for the third quarter, including a plunge in new home sales, mediocre manufacturing data, volatile jobless claims and even (after a healthy period) weaker corporate profits. Many economists fear that third quarter growth could be negative. Even if the economy avoids a double-dip recession, the current pace of growth is too sluggish to create many new jobs or improve middle-class living standards.

As recently as August 3, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner declared that this couldn't happen. "Welcome to the Recovery," he wrote, describing how the $862 billion government stimulus was still rolling out, business investment was booming, and the economy was poised for sustainable growth.

We all make mistakes, but the problem for the American people is that Mr. Geithner's blunder is conceptual. He and President Obama and their economic coterie really believe that government spending can stimulate growth by triggering private "demand," that tax rates are irrelevant to investment decisions, that waves of new regulation can be absorbed by business with little impact on costs or hiring, and that politicians can assail capitalists without having any effect on the movement of capital.

This has been the great Washington policy experiment of the last three years, and it isn't turning out too well. If prosperity were a function of government stimulus, our economy should be booming. The Fed has kept interest rates at near-zero for nearly two years, while Congress has flooded the economy with trillions of dollars in spending, loan guarantees, $8,000 tax credits for housing, "cash for clunkers," and so much more. Never before has government tried to do so much and achieved so little.

Now that the failure is becoming obvious, the liberal explanation is that things would have been worse without all of this government care and feeding. The same economists who recommended the stimulus are now producing studies, based on their Keynesian demand models, claiming that it "saved or created" millions of jobs, even as the overall economy has lost millions of jobs. The counterfactual is impossible to disprove, but the American people can see the reality with their own eyes.

The above table compares growth in the current recovery with the recovery following the recession of 1981-82, the last time the jobless rate exceeded 10%. The contrast is stark.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner





Then after three quarters the recovery was in high gear. Now it is decelerating. Then tax rates were falling, interest rates were coming down and the regulatory state was in retreat. Now taxes are poised to rise sharply, interest rates can't get any lower, and federal agencies are hassling business at every turn. Then business investment was exploding. Now companies are sitting on something like $2 trillion, reluctant to take risks when they don't know what new costs government might next impose on them.

To borrow a phrase, maybe it's time for a change.

























Saturday, September 4, 2010

We don't get it

All presidents take vacations, and all are criticized for it. It's never the right place, the right time. Ronald Reagan went to the ranch, George W. Bush to Crawford, both got knocked. Bill Clinton even poll-tested a vacation site and still was criticized. But Martha's Vineyard—elite, upscale—can't have done President Obama any good, especially following the first lady's foray in Spain. The general feeling this week was summed up by David Letterman: "He'll have plenty of time for vacations when his one term is up. Plenty of time."




The president's position is not good. The past few months have been one long loss of ground. His numbers have dipped well below 50%. Top Democrats tell Politico the House is probably lost and the Senate is in jeopardy. "Recovery summer" is coming to look like "mission accomplished." The president is losing the center.

And on top of that, he is still a mystery to a lot of people.

Actually, what is confounding is that he seems more a mystery to people now than he did when they elected him president.







The president is overexposed, yet on some level the picture is blurry. He's in your face on TV, but you still don't fully get him. People categorize him in political terms: "He's a socialist," "He's a pragmatic progressive." But beyond that disagreement, things get murky. When you think about his domestic political decisions, it's hard to tell if he's playing a higher game or a clueless game. Is he playing three-dimensional chess, or is he simply out of his depth?

Underscoring the unknowns is the continuing question about him and those around him: How did they read the public mood so well before the presidency and so poorly after? In his first 19 months on the job, the president has often focused on issues that were not the top priority of the American people. He was thinking about one thing—health care—when they were thinking about others—the general economy, deficits. He's on one subject, they're on another. He has been contradictory: I'm for the mosque, I didn't say I'm for the mosque. He's detached from the Gulf oil spill, he's all about the oil spill.

All of this strikes people, understandably, as perplexing. "I don't get what he's doing." Which becomes, in time, "I don't get who he is." In an atmosphere of such questioning they'll consider any and all possibilities, including, apparently, that he is a Muslim. Which, according to a recent Pew poll, 18% think he is. That is up from 11% in February 2009.



Liberals and the left are indignant about this, and angry. For a week all you heard from cable anchors was "PEOPLE think OBAMA is a MUSLIM. It's in the POLLS. How do you EXPLAIN it?" Every time I heard it, I'd think: Maybe it's because you keep screaming it.



Some of the reason for the relatively high number of people who believe he holds to one faith when in fact he has always said he holds to another, is the steady drumbeat of the voices arrayed against Mr. Obama, that are arrayed against any modern president, and will be against the next one too. But surely some of it is that a lot of people are just trying to figure him out. In that atmosphere they'll consider everything.



When the American people have looked at the presidents of the past few decades they could always sort of say, "I know that guy." Bill Clinton: Southern governor. Good ol' boy, drawlin', flirtin', got himself a Rhodes Scholarship. "I know that guy." George W. Bush: Texan, little rough around the edges, good family, youthful high jinks, stopped drinking, got serious. "I know that guy." Ronald Reagan was harder to peg, but you still knew him: small-town Midwesterner, moved on and up, serious about politics, humorous, patriotic. "I know that guy." Barack Obama? Sleek, cerebral, detached, an academic from Chicago by way of Hawaii and Indonesia. "You know what? I don't know that guy!"

He doesn't fit any categories. He won in 2008 by 9.5 million votes anyway because he was a break with Mr. Bush, and people assumed they'd get to know him. But his more unusual political decisions, and the sometimes contradictory and confusing nature of his leadership, haven't ameliorated or done away with his unusualness. They've heightened it.



The fact that the public doesn't fully understand or have a clear fix on the president leads to many criticisms of his leadership. One is that a leader must show and express the emotions of the people, and he's not very good at it. But I doubt people want a president who goes around emoting, and in any case it's not his job. What people really want, in part, is someone who understands their basic assumptions because, actually, he shares them. It's not "Show us you care!" it's "Be a guy I know. Be someone I get!"

The president is a person who knows how to focus and seems to have a talent for it. But again, his focus is on other things. When a president and a nation are focused together on the same things, the possibility of progress is increased. When they are focused on different things, there is more discord and tension. Mr. Obama's supporters like to compare him with Reagan: 18 months in he had difficulties in the polls too, and a recession. But Reagan was focused on what the American people were focused on: the economy, the size and role of government, the challenge of the Soviet Union. And on the eternal No. 1 issue, the economy, Reagan had a plan that seemed to make sense, in rough terms to try to cut spending and taxes, and force out inflation. People were willing to give it a try. Mr. Obama's plan, to a lot of people, does not make sense, or does not seem fully pertinent, or well-executed.

Mr. Obama seems to be a very independent person, like someone who more or less brought himself up, a child with wandering parents, and grandparents who seem to have been highly individualistic. He is focused on what individually interests him. He relies most on his own thinking. He focused on health care, seeing the higher logic. The people focused on something else. But he's always had faith in his ability to think it through.



Now he's hit a roadblock, and in November's elections he will hit another, bigger one. One wonders if he will come to reconsider his heavy reliance on his own thoughts. His predecessor did not brag about his résumé and teased himself about his lack of giant intellect, but he had utmost faith in his gut. By 2006, when he had realized he had reason to doubt even that, he flailed. The presidency has a way of winnowing you down.

The great question is what happens after November. The hope of the White House, which knows it is about to take a drubbing, is probably this: that the Republicans in Congress will devolve into a freak show, overplay their hand, lose their focus, be a little too colorful. If that meme emerges—and the media will be looking for it—the Republicans may wind up giving the president the positive definition he lacks. They could save him.



The White House must be hoping that a year from now, people will start looking at the president and saying "Hey, I do know that guy. He's the moderate

Barry Bulakites

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Old Mutual Sells US Life Operation

London-listed financial services group Old Mutual plc announced it will sell its U.S. life insurance operations as it released a strong earnings report for the first half of 2010.




Old Mutual said it agreed to sell the U.S. operations to affiliates of Harbinger Capital Partners LLC, a New York private investment fund for $350 million (263.6 million euros). The transaction is expected to be completed on or after Dec. 31, 2010, Old Mutual said.



The announcement came as Old Mutual released its first-half earnings, showing a net profit of 810 million pounds (972 million euros), up from 188 million pounds for the same period a year earlier. Annual premium equivalent sales rose 28% to 814 million pounds in the half, as Old Mutual reported a “rapid rise” in U.K. life and pension sales, and strong sales in South Africa, the group’s home country.



Old Mutual said the U.S. sale will “result in a significant reduction in the group’s exposure to U.S. credit markets, and a corresponding reduction in economic capital at risk.”



Net proceeds from the sale will be used to reduce the group’s net debt. Old Mutual said the sale will also allow it to redeploy about $115 million in capital from an associated reinsurance captive, OM Re.



Old Mutual said it currently finances $775 million of redundant U.S. reserves with a letter of credit. The group will continue to finance $300 million of reserves on the annuity business, a commitment that is expected to run down until it is refinanced by the buyer on or before Dec. 31, 2015.

Barry L. Bulakites

Saturday, July 31, 2010

Party Anyone?

Barry Bulakites

Cuomo after Life Companies

New Ink Atborney General Andrew Cuomo says his office has opened a major fraud into the life insurance industry. Cuomo said Thursday that his office has issues subponenas on Prudential Financial and Met Life.

Friday, July 30, 2010

Uncle Sam I am

I do not like this Uncle Sam, I do not like his health care scam.


I do not like these dirty crooks, or how they lie and cook the books.

I do not like when Congress steals,

I do not like their secret deals.

I do not like this speaker Nan,

I do not like this 'YES WE CAN'.

I do not like this spending spree,

I'm smart, I know that nothing's free,

I do not like your smug replies, when I complain about your lies.

I do not like this kind of hope.

I do not like it. nope, nope, nope!















Barry L. Bulakites

Sunday, July 25, 2010

The Table Bay CPA Advantage Edge Program

Table Bay's CPA Advantage Edge Program in Action

Life on the Road

In the "hot" city of Chicago this weekend from Denver. On the way to Michigan for a CPA Event and the one and only Top Gun training program. Cubs beat the Cards yesterday at Wrigley...great ball park but still not Fenway.

New Decade, New Directions

There's nothing magic about entering a new decade, yet each tends to generate its own label: the Roaring'20s," the "Depression-Era '30s," the Swinging '60s " In hindsight, we may even refer to the decade just finished as the "Terrible 2000s" or the "Naught-Oughts" because the stock market finished the decade exactly where it starterd. Each decade seems to carry its own signature in social trends, as well as economic forces that impact those social trends. In the past 10 years, we saw the twin stock market peaks of 2000 and 2008, two bear markets and then substantial rebounds. It was a decade in which we learned to understand volatility.

In the days ahead we will explore how your perspective may determine your prospects for success.

Barry Bulakites

Sunday, July 18, 2010

SEC Defeated

A federal appeals court has sided with agents and others who want the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to classify indexed annuities as insurance products rather than as securities.




A 3-judge panel at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the plaintiffs' request for a rehearing in American Equity vs. SEC because the panel agrees with the plaintiffs' view that the SEC "failed properly to consider the effect of the rule upon efficiency, competition, and capital formation."



"The SEC argues it is likely to reissue Rule 151A but it also acknowledges it is in the midst of analyzing the effect of the rule upon the law of each state," the panel says. "As the petitioners point out, the commission cannot know whether that analysis will support reissuing Rule 151A until it has been completed."



The panel included justices David Sentelle, Douglas Ginsburg and Judith Rogers.



The decision to grant the request for a rehearing revises a decision the same panel issued in July 2009. The said then that the SEC's efforts to analyze the effects of Rule 151A on securities market efficiency, competition and capital formation were “lacking.”



The SEC has been trying to split jurisdiction over indexed annuities with state insurance regulators. SEC officials have argued that indexed annuities act like securities and ought to be regulated the same way securities are; SEC critics have asserted that the products are backed by insurers' general account investments and expose holders to no risk of principal loss due to investment market fluctuations.



The SEC issued Rule 151A in January 2009, but it was not planning to enforce the rule until Jan. 12, 2011. Insurers sued to block implementation of the rule.



In July 2009, the D.C. Court of Appeals panel held that the SEC had authority to classify indexed annuities as securities, but it sent the rule back to the SEC for further work because of its conclusion that the analysis of the rule's effects had been faulty.



Old Mutual filed a petition for a rehearing in December, asking the court to stay the rule 2 years after any new rule was reissued. But, after receiving comments from the SEC on the agency's plans to conduct an analysis by this spring, the court today acted to throw out the rule entirely.



The panel says in its latest decision that the SEC “cannot justify the adoption of a particular rule based solely on the assertion that the existence of a rule provides greater clarity to an area that remained unclear in the absence of any rule.”



“Whatever rule the SEC chose to adopt could equally be said to make the previously unregulated market clearer than it would be without that adoption,” the panel says. "The fact that federal regulation of EIAs would bring ‘clarity’ to this area of the law is not helpful in assessing the effect Rule 151A has on competition.”



Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, recently persuaded a congressional conference committee to add a provision to H.R. 4173, the financial services bill, that would classify indexed annuities governed by standards developed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Kansas City, Mo., as state-regulated insurance products.



The House already has passed H.R. 4173, and Senate leaders tonight announced that they have the votes to get the completed bill through the Senate.



WHAT IT ALL MEANS



A SEC spokesman says, “Today's Court order maintains the status quo as the rule had not yet gone into effect.”



The SEC "will study the court's order, as well as the legislative changes under consideration by Congress in the financial reform legislation to determine how best to proceed,” the spokesman says.



Eric Marhoun, general counsel of Old Mutual Insurance Company, Baltimore, one of the leaders of efforts to fight Rule 151A, welcomed the appeals court ruling.



“Most likely this means that the SEC will drop efforts to regulate this product,” Marhoun says. "We are very pleased by the court’s action because it wipes the slate clean and clarifies that Rule 151A is null and void. This was a big victory both for agents and for consumers who have come to rely on the guarantees provided by FIAs, but we plan to stay vigilant until we're sure the threat has passed."



The fact that the court vacated the rule "was a nice bonus,” says Phil Bartz of McKenna, Long & Aldridge, Washington. Bartz, Old Mutual’s outside counsel, filed the petition on behalf of Old Mutual.



“We felt the court needed to do something to protect the agents and companies writing [indexed annuity] products, and so we conservatively asked for a 2-year implementation period,” he says.



Because the court vacated Rule 151A, the SEC must completely start over. The SEC can now rethink the rule and may simply drop it, Bartz says.



WASHINGTON BUREAU -- A federal appeals court has sided with agents and others who want the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to classify indexed annuities as insurance products rather than as securities.



A 3-judge panel at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the plaintiffs' request for a rehearing in American Equity vs. SEC because the panel agrees with the plaintiffs' view that the SEC "failed properly to consider the effect of the rule upon efficiency, competition, and capital formation."



"The SEC argues it is likely to reissue Rule 151A but it also acknowledges it is in the midst of analyzing the effect of the rule upon the law of each state," the panel says. "As the petitioners point out, the commission cannot know whether that analysis will support reissuing Rule 151A until it has been completed."



The panel included justices David Sentelle, Douglas Ginsburg and Judith Rogers.



The decision to grant the request for a rehearing revises a decision the same panel issued in July 2009. The said then that the SEC's efforts to analyze the effects of Rule 151A on securities market efficiency, competition and capital formation were “lacking.”



The SEC has been trying to split jurisdiction over indexed annuities with state insurance regulators. SEC officials have argued that indexed annuities act like securities and ought to be regulated the same way securities are; SEC critics have asserted that the products are backed by insurers' general account investments and expose holders to no risk of principal loss due to investment market fluctuations.



The SEC issued Rule 151A in January 2009, but it was not planning to enforce the rule until Jan. 12, 2011. Insurers sued to block implementation of the rule.



In July 2009, the D.C. Court of Appeals panel held that the SEC had authority to classify indexed annuities as securities, but it sent the rule back to the SEC for further work because of its conclusion that the analysis of the rule's effects had been faulty.



Old Mutual filed a petition for a rehearing in December, asking the court to stay the rule 2 years after any new rule was reissued. But, after receiving comments from the SEC on the agency's plans to conduct an analysis by this spring, the court today acted to throw out the rule entirely.



The panel says in its latest decision that the SEC “cannot justify the adoption of a particular rule based solely on the assertion that the existence of a rule provides greater clarity to an area that remained unclear in the absence of any rule.”



“Whatever rule the SEC chose to adopt could equally be said to make the previously unregulated market clearer than it would be without that adoption,” the panel says. "The fact that federal regulation of EIAs would bring ‘clarity’ to this area of the law is not helpful in assessing the effect Rule 151A has on competition.”



Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, recently persuaded a congressional conference committee to add a provision to H.R. 4173, the financial services bill, that would classify indexed annuities governed by standards developed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, Kansas City, Mo., as state-regulated insurance products.



The House already has passed H.R. 4173, and Senate leaders tonight announced that they have the votes to get the completed bill through the Senate.



WHAT IT ALL MEANS



A SEC spokesman says, “Today's Court order maintains the status quo as the rule had not yet gone into effect.”



The SEC "will study the court's order, as well as the legislative changes under consideration by Congress in the financial reform legislation to determine how best to proceed,” the spokesman says.



Eric Marhoun, general counsel of Old Mutual Insurance Company, Baltimore, one of the leaders of efforts to fight Rule 151A, welcomed the appeals court ruling.



“Most likely this means that the SEC will drop efforts to regulate this product,” Marhoun says. "We are very pleased by the court’s action because it wipes the slate clean and clarifies that Rule 151A is null and void. This was a big victory both for agents and for consumers who have come to rely on the guarantees provided by FIAs, but we plan to stay vigilant until we're sure the threat has passed."



The fact that the court vacated the rule "was a nice bonus,” says Phil Bartz of McKenna, Long & Aldridge, Washington. Bartz, Old Mutual’s outside counsel, filed the petition on behalf of Old Mutual.



“We felt the court needed to do something to protect the agents and companies writing [indexed annuity] products, and so we conservatively asked for a 2-year implementation period,” he says.



Because the court vacated Rule 151A, the SEC must completely start over. The SEC can now rethink the rule and may simply drop it, Bartz says.





Barry Bulakites

The Best Movie of the Summer thus far?

See Inception - Great Movie!

Saturday, June 19, 2010

The Road Life

The summer travel season is upon us and along with ut coems all those wonderful people that don't frequent the airport often thereby clogging up and already horendous situation. When I retire I plan on writinng the funny stories of life on the road in these United States. In the meantime we'll comment on the state of travel and share some of the funny and maddening moments of life on the road - hey George Clooney has nothing on me in the travel department.

By the way my qualifications for the assigmnent are deep.

Flights in past 12 months = 186
Time in the air = 1 month of my life
Security Lines = 1 week of my life
Time in airports = 1 month of my life
Nights in Hotels =251
States Visited = 42
Cities = 150
Presentations = 250+
Additional Gray Hair - No Comment

Barry Bulakites
President Table Bay Financial Network

Celtics Stand Tall

Not for nothing but the Celtics played better than the Cav's, Magic, and Lakers - Yes Lakers!

The Celts knocked out the #1 and # 2 best teams in basketball and took # 3 to the final 15 seconds. Hold your head high boys it was a great run, now - Go Red Sox!

Barry Bulakites

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Attending The 2010 Advisors Summit

For many advisors the year 2009 was less than great. The decade ended on a sour note for many financial advisors. The reality is that the techniques and methods that worked in the past are simply no longer working.

Whay are some advisors thriving at a time when most are mearly struggling to survive? The simple answer is that yesterday's strategies can't meet the challenges that advisors face today.

That's the bad news. The good news is that Table Bay Financial can give you the answers to the new realities that face advisors. Filing the pipeline with quailfied candidates and using a anti-traditional sales approch gives advisors and edge over their competitors. Are you tired of the endless competition for the same dollars.

Smart advisors will be in Las Vegas March 24-26th to hear the answers to the key questions about the future of the financial services indusrty. Go to www.tablebayfinancial.com for more information on the must attend event!

Barry Bulakites
Table Bay Financial
America's IRA Experts

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Sales Wisdom....

When a deal you get works for you, don't try pushing a single into a double. A hit is a hit....

Barry L. Bulakites
Table Bay Financial