Back to Page
What Happened When I Emailed 30 Australian Health Funds
I emailed 30 Australian health funds with one simple question that potential members ask daily. The response gaps were shocking - and they're costing funds new members.
Membership Growth
June 23, 2025

Steven Kryger


Health funds desperately want new members (or so I thought).
So I tested them.
I sent a straightforward question via email to 30 Australian health funds:
"How long are the waiting periods for pre-existing conditions?"
It's the kind of question they get asked multiple times every day.
The Response Times
The results were revealing:
✅ Only 1 fund (3%) responded within an hour
✅ 16 funds (53%) responded within 1 day
✅ 24 funds (80%) responded within 3 days
One major fund took two weeks to respond!
The Concerning Gaps
But it's what didn't happen that was most telling:
❌ 5 funds (17%) never replied at all
❌ 4 funds (13%) refused to communicate via email
❌ 6 funds (20%) required ID verification before answering
"Tell Us Your Membership Number"
One in five health funds assumed I was already a member and wouldn't proceed without my membership details:
"We'd like to help with your enquiry. Before we do, we need to satisfy certain privacy requirements so can you please confirm the following information: Your date of birth and Your membership number."
This is a potential member asking a basic question, not an existing member making a claim.
No Email?
I was surprised by how many funds refused to communicate via email. Four funds provided an auto-reply along these lines:
"Hi there, we've moved away from email and will no longer answer member enquiries."
In a competitive sector fighting for every member, this approach seems counterintuitive.
The Lesson
What happened here was a stark contrast to my experience when I emailed all 18 AFL clubs and asked "Do you have family memberships?"
Every unanswered email is a potential member walking away. Every delayed response is someone questioning whether you're worth joining.
If your organisation wants to acquire new members, here's your homework: audit your response times and the quality of your responses.
You might be surprised by what you discover.
Health funds desperately want new members (or so I thought).
So I tested them.
I sent a straightforward question via email to 30 Australian health funds:
"How long are the waiting periods for pre-existing conditions?"
It's the kind of question they get asked multiple times every day.
The Response Times
The results were revealing:
✅ Only 1 fund (3%) responded within an hour
✅ 16 funds (53%) responded within 1 day
✅ 24 funds (80%) responded within 3 days
One major fund took two weeks to respond!
The Concerning Gaps
But it's what didn't happen that was most telling:
❌ 5 funds (17%) never replied at all
❌ 4 funds (13%) refused to communicate via email
❌ 6 funds (20%) required ID verification before answering
"Tell Us Your Membership Number"
One in five health funds assumed I was already a member and wouldn't proceed without my membership details:
"We'd like to help with your enquiry. Before we do, we need to satisfy certain privacy requirements so can you please confirm the following information: Your date of birth and Your membership number."
This is a potential member asking a basic question, not an existing member making a claim.
No Email?
I was surprised by how many funds refused to communicate via email. Four funds provided an auto-reply along these lines:
"Hi there, we've moved away from email and will no longer answer member enquiries."
In a competitive sector fighting for every member, this approach seems counterintuitive.
The Lesson
What happened here was a stark contrast to my experience when I emailed all 18 AFL clubs and asked "Do you have family memberships?"
Every unanswered email is a potential member walking away. Every delayed response is someone questioning whether you're worth joining.
If your organisation wants to acquire new members, here's your homework: audit your response times and the quality of your responses.
You might be surprised by what you discover.
Health funds desperately want new members (or so I thought).
So I tested them.
I sent a straightforward question via email to 30 Australian health funds:
"How long are the waiting periods for pre-existing conditions?"
It's the kind of question they get asked multiple times every day.
The Response Times
The results were revealing:
✅ Only 1 fund (3%) responded within an hour
✅ 16 funds (53%) responded within 1 day
✅ 24 funds (80%) responded within 3 days
One major fund took two weeks to respond!
The Concerning Gaps
But it's what didn't happen that was most telling:
❌ 5 funds (17%) never replied at all
❌ 4 funds (13%) refused to communicate via email
❌ 6 funds (20%) required ID verification before answering
"Tell Us Your Membership Number"
One in five health funds assumed I was already a member and wouldn't proceed without my membership details:
"We'd like to help with your enquiry. Before we do, we need to satisfy certain privacy requirements so can you please confirm the following information: Your date of birth and Your membership number."
This is a potential member asking a basic question, not an existing member making a claim.
No Email?
I was surprised by how many funds refused to communicate via email. Four funds provided an auto-reply along these lines:
"Hi there, we've moved away from email and will no longer answer member enquiries."
In a competitive sector fighting for every member, this approach seems counterintuitive.
The Lesson
What happened here was a stark contrast to my experience when I emailed all 18 AFL clubs and asked "Do you have family memberships?"
Every unanswered email is a potential member walking away. Every delayed response is someone questioning whether you're worth joining.
If your organisation wants to acquire new members, here's your homework: audit your response times and the quality of your responses.
You might be surprised by what you discover.