If you still think bedbugs are only a problem for the great unwashed living in squalorous tenements, read the news. Your customers probably already have, especially if they’re located in Terminex’s recent list of cities with the biggest bedbug problems, including New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and Chicago.

Bedbugs are a growing problem, not just for homeowners and apartment managers, but also for some of the biggest names in retail (two Abercrombie & Fitch stores in Manhattan were recently forced to close because of the problem, as was an AMC Theater in Times Square).

And if you think these pernicious pests are just a problem for the Big Apple, consider this: although they prefer places with beds where they can come out at night and feed on people, bedbugs are becoming increasingly common in downtown office spaces, even in filing cabinets, in all the metro areas where bedbugs are prevalent. Yes — bedbugs could be living in those file cabinets in your own office.

Why bedbugs and why now? I spoke at length with entomologist and expert witness Lawrence J. Pinto about the rapid growth of this problem, which is often blamed on the FDA’s failure to approve the use of a pesticide as lethal to bedbugs as DDT, which was banned in 1972. Not true, says Pinto, coauthor of “Bed Bug Handbook: The Complete Guide to Bed Bugs and Their Control.”

“DDT was the magic bullet when it was introduced after World War II, but within a few years, bedbugs had gotten resistant to it and the pest control industry wasn’t using it anymore because it didn’t work,” he said. “The chemicals of the day were the reason we got rid of bedbugs in the first place; they were a scourge in the 1930s, but by the late ‘50s and early ‘60s, they were gone. Pest control companies in the ‘70s and ‘80s saw so few cases that they stopped treating for them.”

Although the bedbug problem began to resurface in the mid-1990s, it was still rare. However, in the last 5 to 6 years, the number of bedbug infestations has “exploded” (ewww), Pinto said. According to a recent survey by the National Pest Management Assn., 10 years ago only 10 percent of pest control companies were seeing bedbug problems. The figure is now 80 percent.

At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, the rise in bedbugs can be at least partially attributed to the influx of goods and people from the world’s less developed countries, Pinto said. ”The way international travel changed is the spur,” he said. “Today, the whole world is traveling from places in the world where bedbugs are common. And not just people, but products – if you package something in a box and ship it to New York, it will have potential to contain bedbugs or any other pest.”

The other half of the equation is the “shy and cryptic” nature of the bedbugs themselves. Not only are they good at hiding (in beds, furniture, walls, clothing), they are also prolific breeders and extremely hardy – and adult bedbugs can survive without feeding for a year and a half, Pinto said.

Many apartments spend as much as $100,000 a year dealing with getting rid of intial problem, which doesn’t include maintenance to keep them away, Pinto said. For the typical homeowner, the cost is anywhere from $300 to $1,200, and probably somewhere in the middle. (This doesn’t include the cost of special bedbug-sniffing dogs, which are 96 percent accurate in detecting the pests and cost $300 and up to sniff out a private home.) Treatment, which includes not only the application of pesticides, but steam and vacuum cleaning, usually takes three applications to eradicate the pest. “Bedbugs are the worst problem in pest control, nothing else compares to it,” Pinto said.

And because bedbugs, like termites or vermin, are excluded from personal and commercial insurance policies, business owners are on the hook for cleanup costs. “Bedbugs are considered a maintenance issue,” said Loretta Worters of III, who spends a lot of her time these days talking about bedbugs (http://twitter.com/LWorters). “Insurance coverage has broadened over time.  It used to be insurance just covered fire, then it expanded to include such perils as theft and wind.  But bedbugs, or bugs of any kind, have never been covered. There are no riders or additional coverages that could cover pests,” she added. “I don’t know about hundreds of thousands of dollars, but if it spreads throughout a big building it would be extremely expensive for the building owner.”

In New York, where the pest is most prevalent, legislators are looking for ways around this. Brooklyn Asssemblyman Dov Hikind and Senate Majority Conference Leader John Sampson plan to introduce a bill that would require insurers who underwrite property and casualty policies in the state to offer policies that cover the cost of bedbug infestations. And there is also a bill under consideration (New York State Assembly Bill A10081) to give a tax credit to residents who lose property due to bedbugs in their homes. And only days ago, New York Gov. David Patterson signed the Bedbug Disclosure Act, which requires apartment owners to inform consumers if bedbugs were discovered in an apartment, said Loretta Worters of III.   

It seems to me that some enterprising underwriters could look on bedbugs as an opportunity to craft some interesting coverage that, for a price, could protect businesses against costs related to their eradication. But since this coverage doesn’t yet exist, what should agents tell their business customers about risk management for bedbugs?

Larry Pinto suggests starting with full disclosure if a problem has been detected and is being treated, which could prevent lawsuits in the future. Awareness and early detection are key. “You can control bedbugs in any site if you have the money and cooperation,” he said. “Management must be sure to inspect and treat not only the areas where there are bedbugs, but the adjacent areas as well.” And although prevention is easier than mitigation, it’s sometimes hard to convince management of this, he added. “Your pest control service should be doing regular maintenance focused on bedbugs, and managers also need to make their custodial staff and residents aware of the threat — and if there is a problem, to attack it aggressively.”

There are also some surprisingly low-tech, low-cost ways to prevent a problem, including bedbug-proof encasements that go over mattresses, box springs and pillows, and plastic “insect interceptors” that go under the legs of beds and furniture and trap bedbugs. And because bedbugs are vulnerable to heat, simply putting infested bedding and clothing into a standard clothes dryer is enough to kill both eggs and adults, Pinto said.

I’d love to hear from any readers, especially those in big bedbug cities, about what their customers are saying about the problem. Anyone care to bite? (hahahaha….)

My two sons.

Everybody loves pets — at least I do, and I have plenty of company. But can an independent agent make money from them? Based on demographics, it seems like a definite “yes.”

Consider these facts:

• According to the American Pet Products Assn.’s 2009/2010 National Pet Owners Survey, 62% of U.S. households (71.4 million homes) own a pet, which equates to 71.4 millions homes. In 1988, the first year the survey was conducted, only 56% of U.S. households owned a pet. While dogs lead the pack at 45.6%, other pets include  horses, fish, reptiles and “small animals” (probably nasty varmints like ferrets).
• While pet spending may not be recession proof, it is “recession resistant”: Americans are actually spending more money on all these pets: the survey above estimated the 2010 number at $47.7 billion — more than the GDP of countries including Tunisia, Croatia and Ecuador!
• According to Small Business Trends, the U.S. pet insurance market has gone “mainstream,” at about $332 million in premium in 2009, up from approximately $272 million in 2009 (a 22% increase) an expected to reach $400 million in 2010.
• Pet medical care has become almost as sophisticated as that of humans. According to MSN Money, the average cost of medical care over the lifetime of a pet can run between $2,000 and $6,000 (oh hell no…I’m here to tell you that’s a drop in the bucket — check out my earlier blog post on dog surgery).

Program administrator NIP Group is betting on pets. Its new PetPro program covers the entire gamut of pet-related services — not just the typical professional liability and business risks of vets, but all the ancillary services as well: hospitals, labs, dog walkers and groomers, doggie day care, even not-for-profit animal shelters and rescue organizations.

The program, which launched this month and is currently being written in 46 states, was designed with input from NIP agents, who saw the need for a one-stop program for pet-related exposures, said Kelly Spencer, PetPro program manager. ”We built this from the ground up for this industry because we wanted to be the place to look for pet care professionals; from small businesses like one-person dog walkers through multistate animal hospital associations with hundreds of employees.”

Besides the undeniable growth of the business segment, NIP CEO Richard Augustyn was also instrumental in developing the program. He is involved in pet rescue organizations, and believes in the need for such a product. Kelly was brought into the picture because of her background as a veterinary technician, among other pet-related job descriptions.

NIP turned to its agents as the experts in the area, Kelly said. “A number of them specialize in insuring vets for professional liability coverage, but they saw more smaller businesses cropping up that no one would have thought of.” Dogsitters, for instance: “Many of them don’t recognize that they need coverage, but there are plenty of exposures in the field that they need coverage for.”

And although a single dogwalker or two doesn’t make for big business, the fact that PetPro bundles all related pet coverages makes it less labor intensive and more profitable for the agent. And because many pet businesses are combinations — many doggie day care businesses also do grooming, training and boarding — using the NIP program eliminates the need for the agent to get several different insurance policies with different ex dates. “Brokers are excited about fact that complex businesses can be handled in one place,” Kelly said.

Best of all to animal lovers, PetPro also mains the PetPro Charitable Fund (check it out on Facebook), in which a portion of the program’s proceeds go to fund animal welfare causes.

So can an agent make money on pets? What do you think?

Wow, how’s that for an inflammatory headline! 

And no, I’m not just going for shock value. The thought has been in my mind recently after receiving a lengthy listing from the Illinois Insurance Department on independent agents in our state being fined, having their licenses pulled, or being denied licenses. And not for stuff like being out of trust, either. We’re talking for the most part about people with preexisting criminal records — ranging from child support deadbeats, DUI slugs, drug dealers, child pornography convicts, even a murderer. 

Here’s a sampling: 

Jerome F. Johnson, Chicago – Application for insurance producer license denied, effective May 17, 2010. Mr. Johnson’s application for a license to sell life, accident and health insurance was denied as a result of an investigation which revealed that the Applicant was convicted of felony Murder on January 27, 1971, and failed to provide documentation with his application effective June 9, 2010.

Timothy A. Rasey, Hoffman Estates – Application for insurance producer license denied. Mr. Rasey’s application for a license to sell life, accident, and health insurance was denied as a result of an investigation which revealed that the Applicant was convicted of felony Child Pornography on December 17, 1998.

Michael J. Smith, Chicago — Mr. Smith was licensed to sell life, accident, and health insurance. His license was revoked as a result of an investigation which revealed that he was convicted of six counts of felony Unlawful Distribution of a Controlled Substance on January 29, 2003. – Insurance producer license revoked effective May 28, 2010.

Of course, everyone has the right to go straight and make an honest living after serving time, but then there are the others who are still at it:

Jason A. McKay, Bolingbrook – Mr. McKay was licensed to sell life, accident, and health insurance since January 18, 2008. Mr. McKay’s license was revoked as a result of an investigation which revealed that he: created a fraudulent group in order to obtain cheaper premiums; offered to rebate premiums for three consumers; improperly withheld premiums; and submitted insurance documents to an insurer that contained non-genuine signatures. The revocation also includes $25,000 civil penalty and $23,616 in restitution. - Insurance producer license revoked effective May 27, 2010.

I admit there’s  probably something in Lake Michigan water that predisposes so many of its residents to the left-hand path. Besides the tiresome example of Al Capone (who’s been dead for more than 60 years but seems to generate just as much press posthumously as when he was alive), we have the dubious distinction of having roughly 20 percent of our governors indicted on felony charges. (Late, great Chicago journalist Mike Royko once suggested that the Illinois state motto should be, “Will the defendant please rise.”) 

But with the economy showing signs of slipping backward instead of improving, I’m certain that the Land o’ Lincoln doesn’t have the market cornered on corruption. Independent agents handle money, sometimes lots of it, and in the immortal words of prolific ’30s bank robber Willie Sutton, when asked why he robbed banks:” Because that’s where the money is.”

A career as an independent insurance agent is attractive to the legit — and with its entrepreneurial flavor and access to the pocketbooks of both corporate and private America, probably equally attractive to the felonious.

In a blog post here earlier this year, we reported figures from the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud (CAIF) showing that state fraud bureaus were not only seeing an increase in insurance fraud, but in fraud being perpetrated by agents. Just as there are hinky accountants, doctors and lawyers, a job as an insurance agent is sure to attract the unscrupulous. And with no end of tough economic times in sight, you can be sure you’ll be hearing more about this in the future.

Let’s face it, the news isn’t good, no matter where you look. Unemployment figures refuse to budge, oil continues to pump into the Gulf, the stock market is wobbly, the EU is in financial disarray, and politicians spend more time finger-pointing than doing anything about it all.

That’s the macro-level bad news. On the positive side, independent agents are still holding up their end of things. And all I can say is, you guys must be really busy. AA&B and National Underwriter recently called for nominations for our first joint Agency of the Year awards, and although we received plenty of requests for submissions forms, in the end many took a pass on the July 1 deadline.

Although this may be a reflection on our selective criteria, I suspect there’s more to it than that. Based on what I hear from individual agents, things are simply too hectic at their agencies for them to take the time and thought required to respond. A good news/bad news thing: The good news is you’re busy, the bad news is staff cutbacks have probably left you too shorthanded to do much else besides just get along.

AA&B columnist Chris Amrhein recently commented to me about the lack of feedback on my posts at this blog, and I theorized that the crappy economy is keeping all of us too busy for niceities like forum comments. As an insurance educator, Chris is constantly out and about in the field with you guys, and he believes that independent agencies — small businesses serving small businesses — are run by inherently optimistic entrepreneurs who hate cutting back or operating in “survival mode,” but are forced to based on what’s happening in the larger economy. It’s “Chicken Little” syndrome, with agents at the mercy of the tidal wave of bad news begetting more bad news.

Not surprisingly — and tying into Chris’s original observation that my blogs that get the heaviest response deal with social media — the antidote seems to lie in technology. Chris calls Apple the performance exception to the current malaise rule:

In this economy, how can one company consistently continue to charge more, for arguably similar or possibly inferior technology, and still blow results through the roof? Perhaps (Steve) Jobs hasn’t gotten the message what he’s doing just won’t work anymore in this economy. Lord knows there are analysts and pundits daily trying to get him to see the light, but the fool just won’t listen. I wish some on our industry and others would be so foolish.

Very true. But assuming parity between its products and its competitors, what really sets Apple apart? For one thing, Apple is a master at perpetuating its brand, especially to young buyers. Not only that, but Apple gets there first, wherever “there” happens to be. Combining innovative products with ubiquitous branding equals unsurpassed market penetration.

The lesson to be learned for us? Don’t let today’s economic headaches keep you from looking at tomorrow — where the markets are, what are the emerging industries and business needs, and how you can help solve your clients’ newest problems. And of course, don’t underestimate the power of carving out a unique identity for your business and exploiting it to the max — especially through social media, where the new buyers live.

Don’t let “survival mode” get in the way of your future. Even if it hurts a little, take some time right now to think outside the box for ways to move your business out of today’s hard times and into the future.

An article in today’s Wall Street Journal got me thinking about how to put the BP oil spill into perspective.

 The gist of it is that although insured losses from the Deepwater Horizon Gulf Coast oil spill could reach $3.5 billion insured, according to Moody’s, this disaster and the volcanic ash mess earlier this year could end up being a shot in the arm for the insurance industry. In the case of the oil spill,  80 percent of the losses will be carried by self-insured BP, and the volcanic ash thing had little impact on insured losses. The “upside” is, insurers will be able to hike rates on property coverage for oil rigs and offshore energy liability insurance to reflect the increase in risk.

The article concludes:

This would provide some welcome relief for an industry that for years has suffered from declining prices and volumes, because demand for cover declined in the absence of large catastrophes.

Talk about turning lemons into lemonade. You can see this oil spill from space and it’s threatening the whole Gulf Coast, Florida Keys and Cuba, but heck, the insurance industry is happy because we might be able to raise rates.

I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t seem like much of a reason to celebrate.

Last week, III came out with a comprehensive study on the impact of Deepwater Horizon and the possible fallout we can expect to see in the insurance industry. True, the industry may only end up shouldering 20 percent of the direct p-c losses, but a disaster of this magnitude will doubtless spread just as inexorably as the oil itself to all areas — especially as the litigation sharks begin to circle (as of May, 110 lawsuits and counting).

According to III, first- and third-party insurance policies that will take the biggest hits are:

• Business interruption/loss of production income
• Comprehensive general liability
• Environmenta/pollution liability
• Operators’ extra expense (provides coverage when controlling well after a blowout)
• Physical damage
• Workers’ compensation/employers liability

 One of the biggest insurance angles of this story, however, doesn’t lie in potential claims or rate increases, but in risk management — or lack thereof. With the U.S. Attorney General announcing that federal authorities were opening criminal and civil investigations into the spill, it’s likely that a host of risk management oversights will come to light, including increasing pressure on the Minerals Management Service and its lackadaisical regulation of offshore drilling.

In fact, based on the number and magnitude of oil spills over the last 20 or so years, nuclear power plants, in spite of their bad press, are beginning to look like paragons of safety in comparison (there’s an interesting blog on the subject here).

And as far as pinning hard-market hopes on Deepwater fallout, I wouldn’t hold my breath — everyone expected that a hard market would be inevitable after the losses of Hurricane Katrina, but it didn’t happen. Given the fact that there’s still plenty of capacity in the market, it seems unlikely that a single event, even as big as this oil spill, will cause the soft market to magically disappear.

Make my day.

My last blog post on the possibility of a social media backlash got some attention — heck, it even inspired Aartrijk blogger Charles Wasilewski to compare me to Betty White.

But whether we’re branding our businesses using Facebook, Foursquare, LinkFaceTwit or speaking at the Kiwanis Club, an insidious fact lurks under all this hoo-ha — something I wrote about in this blog back in 2008, and made a reappearance in yesterday’s National Underwriter. And that is, as the headline said, “Insurance assets not Americans’ top financial priority.”

From the May 20 news story:

Americans recognize the importance of protecting their assets, but ensuring adequate insurance coverage for homes, cars and other possessions ranks low on Americans’ financial priority list, according to a recent Country Financial survey.

The survey, compiled by Rasmussen Reports, LLC and based on telephone calls to 3,000 Americans, found that just 2.3 percent of Americans listed having the right level of insurance protection on assets as their top financial priority…

With respect to respondents’ biggest financial priorities, having enough money to pay monthly bills far exceeded other concerns, with 53.1 percent stating it is their top priority (Ed: emphasis mine). Saving for a secure retirement (16.6 percent), having adequate health insurance (3.9 percent), saving for a child’s education (2.8 percent), and “some other priority” (5.2 percent) also topped having the right level of insurance protection on assets.

I know I write for a property-casualty publication whose readers primarily insure businesses, and that this article specifically deals with consumers. But the significance of the boldfaced statement above — that more than half of the respondents were more concerned about simply paying their bills than anything else — shouldn’t be lost on anyone who sells any kind of insurance — or anything else, for that matter.

This week the Dow had a hissy fit over the turmoil in the EU and an unemployment report that was worse than the so-called experts expected it to be. To put it colloquially, “Well, duh.”  To put it in macroeconomic terms that even Goldman Sachs can understand, the economy sucks because people are out of work and can’t afford to buy anything. Until that changes, it doesn’t matter what happens on Wall Street, in housing and construction, in retail sales or anywhere else that purports to be an indicator of economic health.

And it’s precisely that elephant in the room that will ultimately render the MySquareFaceTwit discussion as relevant as the old “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” controversy.

Do consumers have to buy insurance? Yes. Do consumers have to buy more than the bare bones coverage, upgrade or cover more stuff? No. And even if they wanted to, a huge percentage of them who are unemployed – 9.9 percent of the U.S. working-age population, as of April — probably can’t afford to.

Luckily for us, though, most Americans can still afford their computer or smartphone service so they can continue to read the latest updates on FaceMyTwitTube — at least for now. Considering the millions of manufacturing, construction and financial services jobs that the Wall Street Journal says are lost forever,  even Americans’ thirst for constant connectedness might not be the inevitability it seems to be now.

In her long-awaited appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” Betty White called Facebook being a “huge waste of time,” adding that “when I was growing up we had a phonebook, but you wouldn’t waste an afternoon with it.” If our crack lawmakers and big businesses don’t figure out a way to address unemployment, we might all be sitting around marketing with the phonebook — if anyone’s phones are still connected and if there’s anything left to sit on.

It’s been a little over a year since my noble experiment with Twitter began (see my blog, ”I’m all a-Twitter“), going on 2 years since lauching this blog, and several years since I’ve been on Facebook and LinkedIn.

Speaking strictly for myself, I’m still not completely sold on the value of social media, at least for myself. To be completely honest, the more I become involved with these communication methods, the more I feel enslaved by them, and I wonder if other users feel the same way. In fact, I wonder if the whole social media thing isn’t getting close to reaching the saturation point.

I realize that this sort of thinking is tantamount to high treason, especially in an industry that lauds social media as essential to marketing and branding. I also realize I may be contradicting myself, because I’ve written repeatedly about the importance of insurance agents using social media, in this very blog and elsewhere. But I’m speaking personally right now, and isn’t that what social media is supposed to be all about — transparency and authenticity?

Facebook alone is single-handedly doing a lot of harm to the concept of social media. On top of infuriating users by changing its “fan” settings to “like” and generating lawsuits by changing privacy settings, just this week there was another “security flaw” that allowed users to view other people’s private live chats and friends requests. Twitter, with its new ad platform, seems to be going down the same path. Both share a common strategy: insinuating themselves into our daily routine as a “free,” easy-to-use, “fun” service, becoming indispensible — and then monetizing that service. I’m just waiting for the day when Facebook, Twitter or both announce that they’re charging users for their services. Wonder how many “friends” we’ll have left when that happens.

Our industry’s acceptance of social media happened with an almost science-fiction-esque rapidity. Remember how long it took insurance to even start thinking about adopting e-mail and Web pages? Social media reached that level of acceptance in a nanosecond. Twitter has only been on the scene since 2007, but it’s already an indispensible part of the branding tool kit, with even the most staid insurance companies tweeting away, like something out of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”

IMHO, as we hepcats on the InterWebs say, I think we are in for a major consumer backlash on social media, whether it’s due to oversaturation, overcommercialization, or being eclipsed by the Next Big Thing. And I don’t think this backlash will necessarily be related to older users, either. You can make the case that I feel this way because I’m an elderly curmudgeon, but statistics show that only 16 percent of the 24-and-younger demographic use Twitter, and that the highly prized Millennial demographic is even starting to be eclipsed on Facebook by older users. Maybe the younger users are already beginning to sense that these sites are becoming oversaturated with commercialism.

I’m not saying that that people will stop using social media, or that we’ll suddenly go back to issuing quotes on paper via snail mail. But people don’t like to be “sold” — especially when the selling comes in the guise of friendship and free expression.

Perhaps today’s forms of social media will be eclipsed by some monster merger of FaceTwitLink, or something new and different that we won’t even see coming. Or maybe people will just get tired of tweeting, texting and talking on cellphones and rediscover the pleasures of face-to-face contact. At least I hope so: A recent study shows that one of 10 of under-25ers would interrupt having sex to take a text message. I sure hope that text message isn’t a tweet from an insurance agent.

Last week I had the pleasure of attending an independent agent seminar presented by Hales & Co. and hosted by National Underwriter and AA&B on “creating and enhancing shareholder value.”

Don’t let the Hales tag fool you: although M&A was a large part of the discussion, it was by no means the only topic. In fact, the all-day event pretty much ran the gamut of all the challenges independent agents face, from complying with the new healthcare reform law and other legislation to building a stronger brand.

The main message I came away with was this: Being an independent insurance agent is not for wimps. Not only are you stuck competing in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression, but you also have to worry about complying with state and federal regulations, finding new business, tracking your insurers’ financial stability, and on top of everything else, staying on top of Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.

And now, to add insult to injury, you’re also a target for professional wrestlers.

In a story that sounds like something from the Onion, last week the St. Petersburg Times reported that Hulk Hogan (real name: Terry Bollea) has sued his insurance broker, Wells Fargo Insurance Services, claiming the broker should have offered him an umbrella policy, which would have protected him from lawsuits when his son crashed his car, catastrophically injuring a passenger in 2007. Although he had a third-party auto liability policy with a $250,000 limit, Hulk recently paid a confidential settlement in the accident, which the broker lawsuit seeks to recover.

The case goes to the heart of the broker-as-consultant issue, which holds the profession to a higher standard of ethics and expertise than a mere policy-pusher. According to the Times article:

Didn’t Bollea have a personal responsibility to investigate on his own what he needed to do to protect his multimillion-dollar net worth?

“Not if you put your trust in your broker,” Florin (Hulk’s lawyer) said.

“This isn’t a personal responsibility case,” Florin said. “This is a professional responsibility case.”

 Every agency consultant, including those at the Hales event, extols the virtues of independent agents and brokers differentiating themselves in a tough market by becoming more professional and consultative. Unfortunately, as the Hulk case demonstrates, that professionalism can be a double-edged sword. If you’ve cut corners to survive the soft market and the recession, that frugality could come back to haunt you if you’re not covering all the bases with your agency services.

 As the industry continues to evolve in sophistication, don’t be surprised if you start seeing more of these types of cases.

And it would be really cool if they could be settled with a cage match.

And now, more unexpected fallout from the recession: senior citizen entrepreneurs.

If you’re not already seeing a demographic shift in the makeup of your small business clients, you probably will soon. A recent study by the Kauffman Foundation, a private organization which tracks entrepreneurism, indicates that to 24-to-34 age bracket of entrepreneurs behind start-up companies, which ruled during the dot.com boom, now has the lowest rate, surpassed by entrepreneurs age 55 to 64, whose start-ups increased 36 percent in 2008. In total, more than 80 percent of all startups were by people over 40 years of age.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise: older workers have been disproportionately affected by the brutal layoffs of recent years, and many close to retirement age have had their portfolios decimated by hard times — their age precludes them from getting another traditional job, and they and can’t afford to retire (just think of all those “consultants” out there).

But societal shifts could also be responsible: today’s middle-aged and older population is healthier and more active, and many are intent on “living the dream” with second or third careers instead of slowly driving Cadillacs in Boca. Many have worked their entire careers making money for someone else, and want to work for themselves for a change while they’re still able to.

The lesson for insurance agents and brokers is that this is just another page in an unfolding saga of how the American workplace is changing. Everyone in our industry is aware of the importance of understanding the Gen Y customer and employee; now it turns out that Gen Y is only part of the equation.

In my recent blog about the multigenerational household, we discussed how the new economic realities are bringing back the days when Mom, Dad and the kids live under the same roof as Grandpa, Grandma, and other members of an extended family. The new configuration creates new risks for the family unit, and new opportunities for agents and brokers who serve them.

Similarly, start-up businesses headed by older entrepreneurs face a unique set of challenges, especially at a time when business loans are hard to come by and employee benefits are in a state of flux.

Are you prepared to serve these new businesses — or even start one yourself instead of retiring?

In the ongoing dialogue about the pros and cons of how involved to get in the social media revolution comes a real monkey wrench: Unvarnished.

In case you haven’t already heard, Unvarnished, which is currently in beta testing, is a new social networking site that will allow “people rating” — from the sounds of it, kind of like LinkedIn on crack cocaine.

Actually, from the description, Unvarnished seems to more closely resemble sites like Yelp and TripAdvisor, except what’s being ranked (or ranked on) isn’t a company, it’s you. Yes, Unvarnished allows anonymous reviewers to take potshots, not at your business, but you as a business professional.

From the Getunvarnished.com site:

Unvarnished reviews help you get the inside scoop on other business professionals, providing candid assessments of coworkers, potential hires, business partners, and more.

By contributing Unvarnished reviews, you can share your knowledge of other professionals, giving credit where credit is due, and valuable feedback where needed.

Lastly, your own Unvarnished profile, which you may create yourself or claim one that has been created for you, helps you take control of and build your own professional reputation. Get recognition for your accomplishments and actively manage your career growth.

Doesn’t sound so scary — except that the reviews are “reviewer identities are hidden from reviews,” and your own profile can either be created by you, or someone who is reviewing you. When this is the case, you can “claim your profile,” and “actively build and manage” your professional reputation. Unfortunately, this seems to primarily consist of defending yourself against anonymous slings and arrows tossed by virtually anyone who chooses to do so.

And although there appears to be a set of review guidelines (reviews should be “business based,” “well written” and “honest”), these seem more like suggestions than rules. There doesn’t appear to be any moderation system, something that’s in place on even the weirdest of message boards. And with 400,000 professional profiles already loaded into the Unvarnished system, your name might already be up there.

The hue and cry has already gone up over the implications of Unvarnished. Seems to me it would be a legal nightmare (or dream, depending on what side you’re coming from), including claims of defamation, privacy violations and libel, not to mention EPL suits if an Unvarnished review results in hiring, firing or job discrimination issues.  A recent Chicago Tribune article quotes Unvarnished developer Peter Kazanjy as calling his brainchild “big and scary,” and a Harvard pundit describing it as empowering “hate, exclusion and polarization.”

Granted, some of the fluffy recommendations on LinkedIn, most solicited by the recipients, should be taken with a grain of salt. But rating a fellow human being isn’t the same as giving one star to a lousy restaurant or complaining about the dirty sheets at a chain motel. No matter how much Unvarnished may claim it’s only rating “professionalism,” the personal aspect is bound to leak in.

In the cutthroat business of insurance, where policies are constantly being shopped and switched, a couple of unsubstantiated bad reviews for an insurance agent can make or break a business. And unless you just started doing business yesterday, you’re bound to have a couple of complaints somewhere in your professional history.

I’d love to hear what you think about this latest wrinkle in social media. Does Unvarnished scare you?