Annuity IQ

I was happy to see an article on the disadvantages of flat fee variable annuities on the WSJOnline publication yesterday. Even though it painted all annuities as being bad it did bring to light that the flat fee variable annuity is not very good.

Actually, this article was strikingly similar to an article I wrote on the issue 6 months ago, found here. It also hammered home points I made about these products on the WSJ forum at the end of April. This, of course, troubled me.

When you Google the term Flat Fee variable annuity or flat fee annuity my site, Annuity IQ, comes up on the first page of the results. This led me to review the information I provided on both my site and the WSJ forum. As I reviewed the information I provided and then at the information the WSJ provided, it was almost identical.

What troubled me the most was the fact that since the information I provided was so close to theirs it made me wonder if they used my story as the foundation for this story. If they did then they did not cite Annuity IQ as part of their research which, obviously, they should have if they did use my information. It is clear that a basic hunt for information would show my web site and with the information provided by WSJ being so similar it makes me wonder how this could have happened.

I think you know where I am going with this and I have sent letters to all of the managing editors of the WSJ. If I get a response I shall fill you in as to what they say. I know that mimicking good ideas is the best form of flattery, but that, in my opinion, is no excuse not to list a source of information. I just want credit where credit is due, if they used my site as part of their research I should be cited, period.

Read the two articles and make up your own mind, but it seems pretty clear to me what happened. Their article can be found online, if you’re a subscriber to the online version, or in the paper version in the May 26^th edition on page B-1.