Diploma of Financial Services (RG146/PS146)

[Pig Lover]

Diploma of financial planning

Hi all,

I am just wondering anyone can help me with this. I did a bachelor degree (non-business) and now thinking of a change of profession. I am doing master of commerce, majoring in banking and finance. I am interest in stock broking, financial planning and superannuation. I am thinking of doing the diploma of financial planning during the holiday. I can't do it at tafe cause my uni timetable would be crushed with the tafe one. I am looking to finish the course as soon as possible and also doing it by distance learning. But when I start looking I find out there is a wide variety of places that run the same course. And also the price is different from around $1300 to $2200. Does anyone know what is the difference between these courses ? I am pretty tight on budget and I just want to be RG146 compliant. It would be great if anyone can give me any recommendation. Also, is the qualification permanent ? Am I suppose to renew it once in a while ? Thanks for your response.

 

[Julia]

Hello pig lover

Can you say why you are attracted to being a stockbroker or financial planner?

What do you consider these roles involve?

 

[Pig Lover]

Hi Julia,

I only did one finance subject this semester and I started getting interested in the stock market. I guess the role of a stock broker is to buy and sell shares on behalf of the client, as well as, making recommendations to the client so he/she can make informed choice.

As for finanical planner, I think is to give advice on how to invest client's money, save tax, plan ofr retirement, etc, with the aim to maximize client's wealth.

I am trying to get more qualifications so I will be set to get into a field that I am interested in. I am not young (27) and I want to make good use of my time during the holiday.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia,

I only did one finance subject this semester and I started getting interested in the stock market. I guess the role of a stock broker is to buy and sell shares on behalf of the client, as well as, making recommendations to the client so he/she can make informed choice.

Yep, sounds so reasonable, doesn't it. Unfortunately most brokers and advisers are more driven by personal greed than the clients' best interests.
They are commission driven and will frequently recommend a client into an investment which will hand down the greatest level of commission to the adviser.

As a lowly adviser, you will do what you are told, according to what stocks your head office wants to shift on behalf of their big clients.

Forget any idealistic notions you may have about looking after the little bloke.

Have a read of the thread which is current at the moment:
"Professional Adviser Fees" and you will see how poor Kayman has been done over.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21047

As for finanical planner, I think is to give advice on how to invest client's money, save tax, plan ofr retirement, etc, with the aim to maximize client's wealth.

Again, nice idea, and we would hope it would all be so. But the above principles sadly apply here also.

(The above comments are made with due apology to any rare advisers out there who are not commission driven.)

I am trying to get more qualifications so I will be set to get into a field that I am interested in. I am not young (27) and I want to make good use of my time during the holiday.

Well, good on you. I admire your capacity to work for what you want.
Don't mean to disillusion you entirely, but it just ain't what you think out there.

 

[Kryzz]

Re: Diploma of financial planning

Hi all,

I am just wondering anyone can help me with this. I did a bachelor degree (non-business) and now thinking of a change of profession. I am doing master of commerce, majoring in banking and finance. I am interest in stock broking, financial planning and superannuation. I am thinking of doing the diploma of financial planning during the holiday. I can't do it at tafe cause my uni timetable would be crushed with the tafe one. I am looking to finish the course as soon as possible and also doing it by distance learning. But when I start looking I find out there is a wide variety of places that run the same course. And also the price is different from around $1300 to $2200. Does anyone know what is the difference between these courses ? I am pretty tight on budget and I just want to be RG146 compliant. It would be great if anyone can give me any recommendation. Also, is the qualification permanent ? Am I suppose to renew it once in a while ? Thanks for your response.

There will be little difference in the course material, maybe customer service, how things are assessed etc. I have one subject to complete with an applied finance degree at my Uni, and have some courses in that degree which are ASIC accredited.

I was originally quoted approx $1,500 for the DFS, once i told them that I had received credit from some of my uni courses (the ASIC accredited ones), the subsequent amount due was approx $250.

Find out if you will receive any credit for subjects you have/will done that are ASIC accredited, if you do, you should not be paying the full price originally quoted

nb: make sure who you go through is legit: http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/ASIC+Training+Register?openDocument

 

[Hurricane]

Hey PL I'm currently completing the DFS with Kaplan, they've split it into 4 modules. The first gives you the "general" RG146 qual (tier 2 I think?) as well as tier 1 compliance in Planning. The other modules give you RG146 tier 1 in Risk Management (i.e insurance) Superannuation and Investment planning.

Basically you need Tier 1 RG146 for each product you'd be advising on so if you wanted to tailor your compliance level strictly for those products, you wouldn't need to go down the DFS route. Otherwise the DFS is a mixed bag made up of the "core" subjects that the provider think you'll need.

I'm doing mine in my spare time (corrospondence) and if you've got half a brain you'll knock it off in no time. It's an assignment (which can be a little challenging in places) followed by an open book [shakes head] exam for each module.

I've found Kaplan ok they don't give much help but their notes are pretty comprehensive and let's be honest here if you can't pass this course you shouldn't be advising people how to invest their life savings!!!!!! Oh and it's about $550 a module if you do it 1 at a time but there are discounts if you pay in full up front.

 

[Pig Lover]

Hi all,

Thanks for telling me the difference between the reality and general notion, Julia. Sounds like you are burnt out and have lost confidence in human sincerity in the industry. I have some experience working in retail shops and I understand sometimes you have to pursue targets by lying or not telling the truth. It's frustrating but that's how it works. I will keep that in mind, thanks for the warning.

Thanks for the info, Kryzz and Hurricane. I've talked to Kaplan and probably will enrol next week. My friend told me it's easy and straight forward but don't get too relax to it.

Thank you for your response everyone.

 

[Julia]

Hi all,

Thanks for telling me the difference between the reality and general notion, Julia. Sounds like you are burnt out and have lost confidence in human sincerity in the industry.

No, I'm not burned out. I've been happily managing my SMSF for many years.
I'm simply aware of the realities of the so called advising profession.

 

[Junior]

Yep, sounds so reasonable, doesn't it. Unfortunately most brokers and advisers are more driven by personal greed than the clients' best interests.
They are commission driven and will frequently recommend a client into an investment which will hand down the greatest level of commission to the adviser.

As a lowly adviser, you will do what you are told, according to what stocks your head office wants to shift on behalf of their big clients.

Forget any idealistic notions you may have about looking after the little bloke.

Hi Julia,

I've been in the industry for about 7 years, and my experience is that things are changing. The public is much more aware of fees and commissions compared to pre-GFC, and there is pressure to move to a fee for advice model. I won't go into more depth at the moment...but like any industry there are good, honest operators, as well as greedy, selfish participants. But I really think things are moving in the right direction.

Higher education standards for advisers and a ban on upfront commissions will help this change.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia,

I've been in the industry for about 7 years, and my experience is that things are changing. The public is much more aware of fees and commissions compared to pre-GFC, and there is pressure to move to a fee for advice model. I won't go into more depth at the moment...but like any industry there are good, honest operators, as well as greedy, selfish participants. But I really think things are moving in the right direction.

Higher education standards for advisers and a ban on upfront commissions will help this change.

Hello Junior,
I'm pleased to hear it. Perhaps all my capacity for idealism has been lost, but I'm finding it hard to believe there won't still be kickbacks to advisers in some form. That is just the way of anyone (funds) wanting to promote their product.

And I'm less than reassured after reading a post in another thread about a component of the qualification for an adviser/planner being an 'open book exam'!!!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Hello Junior,
I'm pleased to hear it. Perhaps all my capacity for idealism has been lost, but I'm finding it hard to believe there won't still be kickbacks to advisers in some form. That is just the way of anyone (funds) wanting to promote their product.

And I'm less than reassured after reading a post in another thread about a component of the qualification for an adviser/planner being an 'open book exam'!!!

agree Julia,

All FPA's are either employed by the banks or institutions or dependent upon them for kickbacks.

gg

 

[Junior]

Hello Junior,
I'm pleased to hear it. Perhaps all my capacity for idealism has been lost, but I'm finding it hard to believe there won't still be kickbacks to advisers in some form. That is just the way of anyone (funds) wanting to promote their product.

And I'm less than reassured after reading a post in another thread about a component of the qualification for an adviser/planner being an 'open book exam'!!!

At the moment, in order to give financial advice, all you need to do is complete the Diploma of FS and have a few years industry experience. Then it's up to a firm with a 'dealers license' to deem whether or not you are ready to give advice under their license. I completed the diploma a few years ago, and it was quite simple, each unit has an open book exam and an assignment....not a sufficient level of content/difficulty to be able to call yourself 'qualified' in my opinion.

In order to be a Certified Financial Planner, you have to complete a bachelor's degree and then complete the CFP course, which is internationally recognised - like CPA.

Since the GFC many independant advisory firms will only appoint advisers who have completed CFP - this is a big step in the right direction. Also, a lot of independant (i.e. non-bank) practises are moving, or have already moved, to a fee for advice model (i.e. no commissions or kickbacks). This is a big positive for the industry, the only issue I can see is that most practises who have gone to fee for advice only want high net worth clients.

 

[Julia]

Junior, in addition to fee for service advisers only being interested in high net wealth clients, do you think also that the average person will be reluctant to seek advice because of the deterrent of an up front fee?

In the past, if they were able to ignore (or were ignorant of) the trailing commissions paid to advisers, they wouldn't care about these because they would not have perceived these as actually coming out of their funds.

Doesn't have to be rational, but that's what I imagine the perception will be amongst the less than financially literate.

 

[Junior]

Well, I think the value of Financial Advice lies more in strategy and asset allocation, rather than actually selecting investments. As we all know, most managed funds struggle to beat an index after fees, so recommending a portfolio of managed funds doesn't really provide much value to a client....they're better off going to a stockbroker for purely investment advice.

As a financial adviser, if you can show a client the value of a particular strategy i.e. you will pay $X amount less tax over the next 3 years, or you will have $X amount more in super by implementing this strategy...then it should be easy to justify an upfront fee. It's more difficult commercially to service an individual with a small amount of assets, but I think if commissions and volume bonuses were phased out...then the industry would find a way to service small investors profitably.

Maybe I am being too idealistic, but I have been through the GFC with a business operating on upfront commissions... and I want to be part of the new wave of advisers!

 

[Julia]

Yes, agree, Junior, about the usefulness of advisers when it comes to tax strategy, estate planning etc.

Best wishes for a successful 2011.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Well, I think the value of Financial Advice lies more in strategy and asset allocation, rather than actually selecting investments. As we all know, most managed funds struggle to beat an index after fees, so recommending a portfolio of managed funds doesn't really provide much value to a client....they're better off going to a stockbroker for purely investment advice.

As a financial adviser, if you can show a client the value of a particular strategy i.e. you will pay $X amount less tax over the next 3 years, or you will have $X amount more in super by implementing this strategy...then it should be easy to justify an upfront fee. It's more difficult commercially to service an individual with a small amount of assets, but I think if commissions and volume bonuses were phased out...then the industry would find a way to service small investors profitably.

Maybe I am being too idealistic, but I have been through the GFC with a business operating on upfront commissions... and I want to be part of the new wave of advisers!

Agree,

But it is possible to get the same information by using Google.

gg

 

[Junior]

Agree,

But it is possible to get the same information by using Google.

gg

Yes, google and forums such as this one are fine for the financially literate.

Howevere the majority of the population aren't in this category, or just don't want to spend hours and hours educating themselves and completing paperwork to implement strategies.

Upfront fees don't just cover advice, they cover meetings, phone calls, modelling and SOA construction and implementation.

 

[robusta]

At the moment, in order to give financial advice, all you need to do is complete the Diploma of FS and have a few years industry experience. Then it's up to a firm with a 'dealers license' to deem whether or not you are ready to give advice under their license. I completed the diploma a few years ago, and it was quite simple, each unit has an open book exam and an assignment....not a sufficient level of content/difficulty to be able to call yourself 'qualified' in my opinion.

In order to be a Certified Financial Planner, you have to complete a bachelor's degree and then complete the CFP course, which is internationally recognised - like CPA.

Since the GFC many independant advisory firms will only appoint advisers who have completed CFP - this is a big step in the right direction. Also, a lot of independant (i.e. non-bank) practises are moving, or have already moved, to a fee for advice model (i.e. no commissions or kickbacks). This is a big positive for the industry, the only issue I can see is that most practises who have gone to fee for advice only want high net worth clients.

Is it possible to be an independant financial advisor? This interests me as a career change but I think I would have trouble with the whole dealer licence idea of selling high fee managed funds.

 

[IB12]

If someone wants to be a financial adviser and is asking for advice on compliance and qualifications (RG146), then let them be. I would stay on topic and just focus on the qualifications, rather than going off topic about the virtues of financial planners and whether or not it's the right career choice.

It's like if someone came up to you and said they were getting married and they were gay. Or a black and white couple came up to you for advice about a getting married. And then you go on about the virtues of getting married to a black person, or being gay, imposing your conservative religious value system on them.
Just give them marriage advice and show them the right places to get the wedding dress.

 

[prawn_86]

Is it possible to be an independant financial advisor? This interests me as a career change but I think I would have trouble with the whole dealer licence idea of selling high fee managed funds.

They do exist Robusta, mainly as boutique firms, but there are many out there. Generally they charge an hourly fee and have no affiliations with any particular products etc.

More and more of them emerging too as people begin to realise how trailling commissions work