Life Insurance Keswick
Saving Money when Buying Life Insurance
Everyone likes to save money but it's important to keep in mind lower premiums may not be the best way to save money in the long term when buying life insurance. The first consideration is there are two quite different types of life insurance - term life insurance and permanent life insurance -- and multiple ways a policy can be purchased. This complexity basically demands the buyer to do some background research, and carefully compare life insurance quotes. Life insurance is not one-size-fits-all and when comparing your options make certain you are comparing apples-to-apples to get the best low cost life insurance.Before you buy a life insurance policy you should decide what type of policy is best for you and focus your efforts on financially sound life insurance companies. Check each company out with independent insurance company rating agencies and eliminate any that don't get high ratings. The obvious step in terms of saving money is to take your time and compare life insurance quotes from a number of companies to get an idea of the range in costs. These numbers can vary by hundreds of dollars.
You should find out if you qualify for group life insurance through an employer or other organization because group rates are often much less expensive than individual life insurance. Group life insurance also comes with the benefit of possibly not requiring a health check to qualify for the plan. Another benefit is your premiums may be deducted from your paycheck so you're less likely to miss a payment.
Once you are ready to buy life insurance go ahead and check around one more time to compare life insurance quotes from a number of insurance providers your previous research determined are financially sound. Once again the same policy can cost hundreds of dollars more or less from different companies. Here is where the initial low premium can catch you. Some policies have low premiums that rapidly increase over time, and other life insurance policies have higher upfront premiums, but don't rise as dramatically. Look into the big picture to see which policy actually costs more after five year or longer. You might find the more expensive policy initially is significantly cheaper over time.
Two more places to save money with life insurance is in discounts. Look for premium discounts that kick in at certain coverage levels, such as a discount that makes $250, 000 in coverage actually less expensive than $200, 000 in coverage due to a premium discount. The second place is how you pay your premium. Paying yearly is often less expensive than paying more frequently, such as paying a monthly life insurance premium.
Sophia Grace & Rosie Perform 'Moment 4 Life'
Bow Wow - Sweat (Explicit) ft Lil Wayne
★ WHITNEY HOUSTON FUNERAL NEWARK NEW JERSEY ★ (IN CASE YOU MISSED IT) (PART 1)
Next page: Life Insurance Houghton Lesprin
Life Insurance Keswick News
Munch's The Scream on the block for $80m
22 Feb 2012 at 5:47am Filed under: Investing
Sotheby's
To be more precise, the pastel piece is one of four versions created by the Norwegian artist. It is one of the most instantly recognisable artworks, perhaps second only to the Mona Lisa.
This version of The Scream (detail pictured) dates from 1895 and is the only one still in private hands. It will be on view in London for the first ever, at an exhibition at Sotheby's opening on 13 April. In New York it will be shown, also for the first time ever, from 27 April, ahead of the 2 May sale.
The work is owned by Norwegian businessman Petter Olsen, whose father Thomas was a friend and later patron of Munch. It has been in the collection of the Olsen family for over 70 years. Thomas Olsen, scion of the great ship-owning dynasty, was a collector and supporter of Munch from the late 1920s. He and the artist were neighbors at Hvitsten in Norway, where the young businessman's role grew from friend to patron.
Munch created four versions of The Scream. The prime example, made in 1893 from tempera and crayon on board, is in the National Gallery of Norway; another pastel version from the same year is thought to be a preliminary sketch for the work and is owned by the Munch Museum in Oslo; the present piece from the Olsen Collection, created in 1895 from pastel on board, most closely follows the prime work in the National Gallery; and a later version in tempera and oil on board, thought to be completed in 1910, is in the collection of the Munch Museum.
There are subtle differences between the four versions. The Scream now up for sale is the most colorful and vibrant of the four; the only version whose original frame was hand-painted by the artist to include a poem about the work's inspiration; and the only version in which one of the two figures in the background turns to look outward onto the cityscape.
The 10 most expensive artworks ever sold
Here is a list of the most valuable artworks ever sold at auction or in a private sale. Looking beyond the top ten, Vincent van Gogh and Pablo Picasso account for many of the world's most expensive artworks, however only Picasso benefited from his fame and wealth during his lifetime while van Gogh is thought to have sold only one painting in his lifetime, the Red Vineyard for 400 Francs.
In eleventh place, just outside the top ten, is Francis' Bacon's 1976 Triptych, sold for $86m at Sotheby's in New York in 2008.
1. $250m The Card Players by Paul Cézanne (1892/93) - private sale
2. $140m No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock(1948) - private sale via Sotheby's
3. $137.5 Woman III by Willem de Kooning (1953) - private sale via Larry Gagosian
4. $135m Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I by Gustav Klimt (1907) - private sale via Christie's
5. $107m Nude, Green Leaves and Bust by Pablo Picasso (1932) - Christie's, New York
6. $104m Garçon à la pipe by Picasso (1905) - Sotheby's, New York
7. $100m Eight Elvises, Andy Warhol (1963) - Private sale via Philippe Ségalo
8. $95m Dora Maar au Chat by Picasso (1941) - Sotheby's, New York
9. $91m Diana and Actaeon by Titian (1556-1559) - private sale
10. $88m Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer II by Klimt (1912) - Christie's, New York
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
3 tech titans
22 Feb 2012 at 5:06am Filed under: Investing
One of the major trends in the world today is the increasing use of technology, from computers and the internet to smart phones and tablets. These devices and technologies are becoming increasingly ubiquitous in markets around the world.
It makes a lot of sense to invest in companies which have a stake in this high-tech future of ours. Which are the best tech businesses to invest in? Well, here are my three picks.
Microsoft
These days, many people would say that Microsoft is a company in decline. After all, PCs are gradually being replaced by tablets. Plus Microsoft is currently precisely nowhere in the booming smart phone market. Who on earth would buy into this firm?
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar%
But take a closer look, and Microsoft is a far more attractive proposition than you'd think. It still dominates the computer industry, with Windows in a leading position in the computer operating system market, and Office virtually monopolizing the business software market. And, don't forget, the Xbox still has a strong position in the games console industry.
Earnings per share has been rising and rising in recent years, with a 30% increase in 2010 and a 28% increase in 2011. Pretty impressive for a company in decline!
What's more, you can expect Microsoft to have an impressive 2012. It doesn't seem that long ago that Windows 7 was released, but in 2012 we can look forward to the launch of Windows 8, which will, for the first time, integrate many of the features of Windows Mobile on a PC operating system. This will give a major boost to computer OS sales.
You might think that computers are in decline, but in fact the number of computers in the world is increasing, going from 1 billion in 2008 to a forecast 2 billion in 2015, driven by explosive growth in emerging markets. Microsoft stands to gain from this.
Plus the launch of Kinect has been incredibly successful, and it won't be long before we see the successor to the now long-in-the-tooth Xbox 360.
That's why I expect to see further increases in earnings per share for Microsoft in 2012 and 2013, and why the shares are a bargain. The business' shares, at the current price of $31.25, trade on a forward P/E ratio of just 11, with a dividend yield of 2.3%.
Google
So computer sales are booming, and as they do the internet is also booming. What is the one company that really stands to benefit from an internet boom? In my mind, it is Google.
These days the words "Google" and "search" are pretty much interchangeable. The scale of this operation is incredible. Google runs over one million servers around the world, and processes over one billion search requests and 24 petabytes of user-generated data every day.
The considerable amount of cash that Google's search operations generate has been used to innovate, and the business now has a strong position in the smart phone market, and is venturing into areas ranging from social networking (with Google+) to driverless cars.
The firm continues to grow, with earnings per share rising 29% in 2010 and 13% in 2011. What's more, I think Google's business has a defendable moat which should ensure its growth for many years to come.
The company, at the current price of $604, is on a very reasonable forward P/E ratio of 14. For me this business is a good bet on the future of the internet.
Apple
Apple is truly the phenomenon of our times. The company has managed to combine the latest technology with world-class design and clever marketing in an incredibly impressive way.
The result is a firm which has grown to become the largest in the world by market capitalisation, worth a cool $468 billion. Now usually when a company reaches this size, it grows only slowly, if at all -- after all, elephants don't gallop, do they?
But the remarkable thing about Apple is that the world's largest company remains a growth company. Microsoft and Google may be growing quickly, but Apple is leaving them in the dust. In both 2010 and 2011 it nearly doubled its eps, and another sizeable increase is predicted for 2012. The current price of $502 puts the business on a forward P/E multiple of just 11.
Of course, much of the business' success is down to the temperamental genius that was Steve Jobs. But even after Jobs, the company has considerable momentum, as well as more stunning new products in preparation -- in 2012 we can look forward to the iPad 3 and perhaps the iPhone 5. That suggests Apple is still some way away from its peak.
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
RBS set to unveil £400m bonus pot
22 Feb 2012 at 4:51am Filed under: News
Taxpayer-backed Royal Bank of Scotland is set to reignite the debate over bankers' pay as it unveils a £400 million bonus pool for its investment bankers in 2011.While the pot would represent a 60% cut on the previous year, the award will follow a year in which the bank announced thousands of job cuts as it reshaped its investment banking arm Global Banking and Markets (GBM). RBS has been at the centre of a row over bankers' pay in recent weeks, which ultimately led to chief executive Stephen Hester waiving his £963,000 all-shares bonus.
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar%
The total payout for its investment bankers was reduced from about £500 million following discussions with the Treasury and UK Financial Investments, which manages the taxpayer's 82% stake in RBS, Sky News said.
The bonus pot will be revealed as RBS reports a return to annual profit for the year - in the region of between £140 million to £300 million according to some analysts - compared with a £239 million loss last year.
The results will give the bank the opportunity to update on the progress it has made towards delivering a decent return to its shareholders - including the taxpayer.
John-Paul Crutchley, analyst at UBS, said RBS has been one of the best performing European banks so far in 2012, as shares have risen nearly 40%, adding around £8 billion of market value - and therefore £6.5 billion to taxpayers' investment.
He went on: "With the benefit of management clearly apparent, it seems surprising that the political establishment which, we think, should be aligned with a good investment outcome for RBS shareholders, is potentially putting this at risk by raising concerns over the chief executive's remuneration."
RBS has moved to strip down its investment arm GBM, which employs 18,500 people worldwide, amid increased Government pressure to focus its operations on UK high street services. The restructuring will lead to around 3,500 job losses, on top of the 2,000 announced by the bank last summer.
The proposed changes include the sale or closure of its cash equities, equity capital markets and mergers and acquisitions businesses, which had income of around £220 million in the nine months to September and are currently unprofitable.
More stories
Five bank branches to close each week
Stop bashing the bankers
RBS and Lloyds set to reveal losses
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
Peacocks saved, but 3,000 jobs go
22 Feb 2012 at 4:36am Filed under: Career
More than 3,000 jobs are to go after ailing fashion chain Peacocks was sold out of administration.The deal with Edinburgh Woollen Mill will save 388 shops and more than 6,000 jobs but administrators from KPMG said it had been forced to close 224 stores with immediate effect, leading to 3,100 redundancies. Chris Laverty, joint administrator at KPMG, said the deal "ensures the continued trading of a well-known name on the high street.
"While it is unfortunate that redundancies have been necessary, we are pleased that we have been able to preserve the majority of the business and jobs."
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar%
Edinburgh Woollen Mill, which has 380 stores, will keep the Cardiff headquarters of Peacocks but KPMG said 16 jobs will go in the city.
Peacocks collapsed under a debt mountain last month in the biggest retail failure since Woolworths, placing 7,500 jobs in jeopardy.
Edinburgh, which beat off Indian textile and clothing giant S Kumars Nationwide, said it would attempt to save some of the stores and jobs being lost today.
However, chief executive Philip Day added: "As you can imagine, there will be a considerable amount of work to undertake over the next few months to stabilise the situation, turn this business around, get the supply chain moving again and excite the customers with great products."
Edinburgh last year bought 33 of Jane Norman's 94 stores out of administration, saving some 400 jobs.
Fashion chain Bonmarche, which was part of the Peacock Group, was sold last month in a deal that will lead to 1,400 job losses and 160 store closures. Private equity firm Sun European Partners bought 230 stores and will continue to employ 2,400 staff.
More stories Terminally ill forced to take unpaid work? The secrets to getting a job revealed Britain's most dangerous jobs
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
Council workers' pay 'down 13%'
22 Feb 2012 at 4:22am Filed under: News
The pay of council workers has fallen to 1990s levels following years of below-inflation settlements and wage freezes, according to a new study.Unison said wages had declined by 13% in the last three years alone, with extra cuts to pay and allowances at local level making the situation even worse. More than a quarter of local government workers now earn less than the so-called Living Wage of £7.20 an hour, forcing many to claim benefits and tax credits, said Unison.
In contrast, the pay of council chief executives increased by 58% between 1998 and 2007, said the report, published ahead of wage talks between local government employers and unions.
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar%
Unison's head of local government Heather Wakefield said: "For many local government workers and their families, it's a daily struggle to stay out of poverty. They're doing vital work caring for the elderly, the vulnerable, for young children, and as job cuts hit, they're picking up the pieces doing even more, for ever-diminishing wages.
"Hundreds of thousands - especially women - are being hit hard by the Tory-led coalition's unfair pay policy. This unprecedented squeeze cannot continue. The local government employers must come forward with a decent offer on pay this year."
Peter Kenway, from the New Policy Institute, which wrote the report for Unison, said: "Local government workers are portrayed as part of a pampered public sector. With two-thirds of them in manual or clerical jobs, doing important and sometimes essential jobs, this report shows what a distortion that picture is.
"Since the last time pay went up, in April 2009, prices have risen 13%. Everyone is feeling the pinch but a fall in living standards this big is much more than that."
Around 1.7 million people work in local government in England and Wales, with three out of four jobs done by women and more than half employed part-time.
Unison's head of local government Heather Wakefield said: "For many local government workers and their families, it's a daily struggle to stay out of poverty. They're doing vital work caring for the elderly, the vulnerable, for young children, and as job cuts hit, they're picking up the pieces doing even more, for ever-diminishing wages.
"Hundreds of thousands - especially women - are being hit hard by the Tory-led coalition's unfair pay policy. This unprecedented squeeze cannot continue. The local government employers must come forward with a decent offer on pay this year."
Peter Kenway, from the New Policy Institute, which wrote the report for Unison, said: "Local government workers are portrayed as part of a pampered public sector. With two-thirds of them in manual or clerical jobs, doing important and sometimes essential jobs, this report shows what a distortion that picture is.
"Since the last time pay went up, in April 2009, prices have risen 13%. Everyone is feeling the pinch but a fall in living standards this big is much more than that."
Around 1.7 million people work in local government in England and Wales, with three out of four jobs done by women and more than half employed part-time.
More stories
Council's CCTV cameras cost £515m
Town banishes charity muggers
Council pays the price for data breach
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
Biggest (and oddest) mobile phone threats
22 Feb 2012 at 4:00am Filed under: Mobile
Dave Thompson/PA Archive/Press Association Images
So what are the strangest, and what are the biggest risks to your mobile?
The phones We are now more wedded to our mobiles than ever, and would be more likely to leave the house without our keys than our ever-present phones.
However, as more of us carry increasingly expensive gadgets, there is more chance that we make an expensive mistake while we are out. Specialist insurer www.gadget-cover.com says that the number of claims for mobiles has doubled in the 12 months to January. So it's worth being aware of the risks we are taking with our phones, and protecting ourselves against them.
The risks According to uSwitch, there were over 1 million mobile phone insurance claims in 2010. The lion's share is for accidental damage. uSwitch says that by far the most common damage is when the phone falls out of your pocket - closely followed by it falling down the toilet (which happens to 101,000 people a year).
Next in line for claims were those left in shops, bars, restaurants and taxis. Many of these were at the tail end of a night out, when it may seem vital to make a call, but callers may be in too advanced a state of refreshment to remember to put the phone back in their pocket.
In fact, just 11% of claims are for phones that are stolen - which puts it fractionally ahead of the risk of dropping the phone down the toilet or leaving it in a taxi.
It seems, therefore, that the biggest risks can be avoided if we take a little more care, leave our phones alone when we are on a night out, and have somewhere sensible to keep our phone, which means it isn't going to fall out whenever we use the loo.
Strangest claims However, you cannot prepare for all eventualities. Gadget-cover raked through its archives and fund some particularly unusual claims. Two (which were eventually rejected as fraudulent) stand out for their eccentricity.
Carmi Korine says: "One attempted claim arose when a customer's son went on holiday with a friend and his friend's parents. The phone was alleged to have disappeared one night when, whilst they were all in bed, a naked guy came in to the parents' room and got in the bed with them.
"The father then awoke and kicked the naked guy out of their room, but before leaving, the naked guy put on the customer's son's trousers, which were on the floor, and left. The phone was said to be in the trousers which were taken by the naked guy. The parents did not think the incursion was strange, and carried on with their sleep. There was no sign of forced entry.
Takeaway "The second incident is also alleged to have involved a loss of trousers. The claimant's son was coming home from a takeaway shop. He said he walked into a back street in order to wait for a cab, which he had called for earlier.
"Whilst waiting for the cab in this back street, a woman, who he described as looking like a prostitute, walked up to him and began touching him and pulling down his trousers. The customer says her son tried to push the 'prostitute' away but was ineffective in his efforts as he was carrying his takeaway in one hand.
"The woman managed to pull his trousers all the way down to his ankles and, after a while, she left and he later realised his phone was no longer in his pocket. The customer's son was so traumatised he did not leave his room for three days."
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
'Win a farm' flops as no-one buys the farm
22 Feb 2012 at 3:30am Filed under: Shopping & Deals
David Cheskin/PA Archive/Press Association Images
It's an appealing notion, and one that garnered 267,000 entries in desperate pursuit of the rural idyll. The trouble was that the way they ran the competition meant no-one won.
The competition The company printed up promotional packs with a unique code on each, but although 267,000 of these codes were entered into the site, none of them was the winner. The owner of that lucky pack must have chucked it out without bothering. There was no mechanism in place to deal with this situation, so there was simply no top prize awarded.
The company admitted it on Facebook, and fans of the page were decidedly unimpressed. Those commenting pointed out that a draw would have seemed more fair, that they could have had a fall-back in place, allowing them to pick another code. Others felt cheated, and some even asked whether the whole promotion was a scam.
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar%
Defence Nigel Parrott, Group Marketing Director at New Covent Garden Soup Co told AOL Money: "We appreciate that people are disappointed that the 'win a farm' prize wasn't won, we are just as disappointed and we take the feelings and comments of our customers very seriously. We had 267,000 entries to the competition, had all packs been entered, someone would definitely have won."
Annie Swift, chief executive of the Institute of Promotional Marketing said there was nothing wrong with the competition itself, saying: "The IPM looked at this promotion before it went live, as we do with thousands of these promotions every year; there was nothing wrong with the terms and conditions. It was legal and it followed the CAP Code, the rules which cover promotions like this."
Disaster However, the promotion has left a nasty taste in the mouth for many consumers. What started out as a competition costing the company millions of pounds in order to generate good publicity has ended in a sorry farce. Parrott said: "We are now reviewing how future promotions should be run and are taking these comments into consideration."
The Facebook commentators, meanwhile, continue to demand that the company finds a way to award the prize.
But what do you think? Does it seem fair to you? What should the company do now? Let us know in the comments.
More stories Why a 22-inch Domino Pizza would be free Milk collectible give-away valued at £1k Five things your bank should do, but doesn't
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
Five bank branches to close each week
22 Feb 2012 at 3:08am Filed under: Current Accounts
Bank branch closures are an emotive subject. And promising not to close branches - or at least, appearing to give that promise - has landed two of the nation's biggest banking names in hot water. Last week the Advertising Standards Authority banned two television ads from Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and NatWest. In them, the banks claimed that they provide banking services wherever and whenever they are the "last bank in town". However, the ads attracted complaints for being misleading since there is at least one area (Farley in Yorkshire) where NatWest closed a branch despite being - you guessed it - the last bank in the town.
RBS mounted the defence that its claim to provide "banking services" did not necessarily mean keeping the branches open, but that was dismissed.
It's just the latest sad chapter in the disappearance of many high street bank branches up and down the UK.
Disappearing branches A report last year from the Campaign for Community Banking Services (CCBS) demonstrated just how banks and building societies are no longer the reliable presence on the high street they once were.
Since 1990, the number of branches has fallen by 7,555 - that's almost 50%! And while things have slowed somewhat over the past decade, there were still 1,889 closures.
In 2010 alone there were 180 closures, while 2011 saw a similar number disappear.
How we compare According to the research by the CCBS, the UK now boasts about 160 bank branches per million inhabitants. This jumps to 190 when you include building societies. Here's how that number compares with our continental cousins:
| Nation | Branches per million inhabitants |
| Spain | 940 |
| Italy | 560 |
| Germany | 470 |
| France | 420 |
Deserting whole communities It's not just about how many branches we have as a nation - it's exactly where those branches are located that matters. And more CCBS data suggests a number of communities are at risk of losing their branches altogether.
There are 414 rural communities where only one bank remains, and 466 urban communities in the same boat. Some of these branches are now 'protected' as a result of pledges by the respective banks to maintain that branch presence. That said, there's no guarantee how long those pledges will remain in place.
Here's the breakdown of where you will find the sole bank communities:
| Region | Rural sole bank communities | Urban sole bank communities | Total |
| North East | 14 | 24 | 38 |
| North West | 31 | 52 | 83 |
| Yorkshire & Humberside | 19 | 45 | 64 |
| Merseyside | 2 | 23 | 25 |
| East Midlands | 28 | 19 | 47 |
| West Midlands | 15 | 41 | 56 |
| East of England | 34 | 44 | 78 |
| Greater London | - | 55 | 55 |
| South East | 51 | 50 | 101 |
| South West | 42 | 37 | 79 |
| Wales | 34 | 12 | 46 |
| Scotland | 144 | 64 | 208 |
It's only going to get worse The CCBS believes we are likely to see even fewer branches on the high street in the next few years. It believes that the number of branches in Britain will fall from 9,550 today to 8,000 by 2018. That's the equivalent of five branch closures a week.
As a result, both the CCBS and the Forum of Private Business are lobbying the Government to pressure big banks into sharing premises in order to stem the tide of the biggest banking brands, that many people rely on, vanishing altogether.
Some rare good news However, not all banks and building societies are cutting back their presence on the high street. Yorkshire Building Society has announced it plans to open 12 new branches over the next two years.
The mutual has made big strides already in growing its branch network thanks to its mergers with Norwich & Peterborough Building Society and Chelsea Building Society, which has resulted in its number of branches rocketing from 135 to 224 over the last three years.
And Lloyds has made clear its intentions to maintain its branch network (for now anyway) with the pledge not to close any more branches over the next three years.
Do we even need bank branches? All this raises the question of exactly what purpose the bank branch fulfils in 2012. With so many people doing their banking online now, is there even a need for branches to exist?
From my own point of view, the only times I go to the bank are when I need to pay in a cheque. That's no more than a handful of times a year, and with cheques in their death throes, I won't even have to do that too much longer.
What do you think? Is it inevitable that more branches will disappear? And is that automatically a bad thing? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Compare and switch bank accounts with Lovemoney
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Read more...
