USAA is supposed to be member-owned, and only a limited group can even join. So:
Should USAA be spending money on sponsoring sports events? Do they even know if they’re getting any real return from it?
What about USAA advertising, especially on TikTok, and using actors to act like warfighters? Does this feel right to anyone?
Honestly, I don’t think they care what members like us think.
I feel like advertising during the Super Bowl is more about giving top executives the chance to sit in the best seats and hang out with players.
Hadley said:
I feel like advertising during the Super Bowl is more about giving top executives the chance to sit in the best seats and hang out with players.
Exactly. That’s what it feels like.
USAA isn’t really just a member-owned company anymore. They’ve got other insurance companies and a bank under their name now. And pretty much anyone with some connection to the military can ‘join.’ But not everyone is a true member of the mutual insurance part.
@Payton
Wait… so who actually owns USAA now?
Tatum said:
@Payton
Wait… so who actually owns USAA now?
Technically, USAA owns itself. They’ve also bought other insurance companies under their brand. Check out this link if you’re curious: AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of United Services Automobile Association, Its Subsidiaries and USAA Capital Corporation
@Payton
So basically, it’s still member-owned… in a way?
Tatum said:
@Payton
So basically, it’s still member-owned… in a way?
Yeah, sort of. It’s what’s called a reciprocal inter-insurance exchange. Most of the voting power stays with a smaller core group, mostly officers. Profits get saved for emergencies and then distributed to these members. But because the actual voters are so spread out, it’s hard for them to keep the board accountable. The board and execs just kind of do their thing.
Tatum said:
@Payton
So basically, it’s still member-owned… in a way?
Wow, that sounds complicated.
@Payton
I don’t think you’re right about this. There are still rules for who can join, and it’s still member-owned. Members even get proxies for votes.
Kellen said:
@Payton
I don’t think you’re right about this. There are still rules for who can join, and it’s still member-owned. Members even get proxies for votes.
It’s member-owned if you’re in the core group, like officers or senior NCOs. If you’re not in that group, you’re insured by one of the companies USAA bought. If you get distributions, you’re a full member. Otherwise, you’re more like a customer. I was a true member for 36 years, so I kind of know what I’m talking about.
It depends. If the ads bring in enough new members or their kids to cover the costs, then it’s fine. If not, it’s just a waste of money.
They should focus on treating their employees better. They’ve admitted they ‘over-invested’ in employees, but now they’ve cut too much, and it shows in customer service. Employees are overworked and scared for their jobs. It’s a mess.
USAA shouldn’t be spending so much on national ads. It’s unnecessary.
If they’re going to advertise, it should only be at military events like the Army-Navy game. Maybe some ads on bases, but that’s it.
Finlo said:
If they’re going to advertise, it should only be at military events like the Army-Navy game. Maybe some ads on bases, but that’s it.
But how would they reach veterans or family members who don’t go on military bases?
@Caden
Most veterans and their families already know about USAA. It’s been a household name in the military for decades. They didn’t even advertise for most of their history. Things only changed when civilian leadership took over and started running it like a profit-focused company.
@Caden
They could just focus on being excellent and let word-of-mouth marketing do the work. Advertising in big events like the Super Bowl seems like a waste of money to me, but targeting communities with high military presence might make sense.
And what’s with hiring someone like Gronk to mispronounce USAA? It’s embarrassing.