Financial Advisors? Why?

[tech/a]

The last sentence Ato wrote in comparison to the rest definitetely got a chuckle out of me.

Most Financial Planners get a Chuckle out of me!

 

[brty]

Tech/A, "Most Financial Planners get a Chuckle out of me!"

I can understand that.

I personally know a few Financial planners. They always seem to be asking me about different stocks and what I think. (they know I've been trading/investing for decades)
Whenever I have questioned them about putting their clients into something that is doing well, they start quoting all sorts of rules and regs they have to follow with their 'advice'. Basically they can't give any good advice to anyone, just general industry BS

I prefer to talk Sports, Holidays, what the kids are doing etc with Financial Planners I meet in society/outings, because they seem to know bugger all about stocks, commodities and real estate, plus if they insist on talking investments, I get a bit aggressive in pulling their industry apart.

 

[tech/a]

Brty

Cant agree more.

95% of these guys are operating under a licence held by someone like Zurich that offer managed funds. All these guys can do legally is place you in a fund. Which they receive an on going fee for giving you a report.

They can’t give you anything more than basic financial rehetoric.
They don’t know anything else.
Of the Three I know 2 would love to be in the financial position that the larger majority of their clients are in. Mind you those clients who use them can’t be THAT smart —— They use them!

The knowledge these guys have in Macro and Micro economics is a joke.
I was at a dinner party when the 2009 crisis was in full flight.
One of these guys was asked about his take on the situation. Never heard so much drivel.
After a few minutes I slipped in a question

But isn’t this all about Credit Default Swaps?

The answer—— What?

And people give these guys 1000s to manage——

Run Forest Run!

 

[Junior]

Your adviser mates aren't very good at explaining what they do. A financial adviser is not an economist or a financial analyst. Playing around in stocks and commodity markets is a full time job - it's not what a financial adviser does and nor do they have time to dedicate to that sort of area.

You guys are in the minority of people who are across their financial situation and have strategies in place to improve your situation over time. You have an understanding of the tax system and the means and desire to grow your wealth over time. You guys can see the bigger picture and think long term.

Many Australians are financially illiterate and/or disinterested and derive great benefit and peace of mind, by having a professional to provide them with education and guidance around their money. As mentioned above, most people think about this month's bills, not about how they are going to fund their lifestyle when they quit working at 65 years old and then live for another 35 years.

There are others who are great at developing their careers and growing their income over time, but are in occupations that are high-stress and time consuming - they don't have the drive or time to look after their financial affairs so they will outsource this to professionals. Doctors & surgeons are a classic example of this. They work long hours and earn great money, but then end up with very expensive lifestyles and plenty of debt, and don't even utilise basic tax planning or set aside cash to invest.

It's all very well assuming everyone will DIY when it comes to money and planning for their future, but it's simply not realistic....these days information is so accessible online, in many ways it's detrimental as you have to wade through so much b/s to find reliable and useful information.

 

[Knobby22]

You are right Junior.
But its like everything, you have to find a good one, like you do with accountants.

My parents were lucky. they were recommended an advisor and he got all their life savings (which wasn't that much) out of the stock market as the GFC started. I am still grateful to him and would recommend him but he has retired now.

 

[brty]

I didn't think it would take long for Tech/A's and my own comments to meet with some opposition.

My opinion is and always has been that no-one is going to look after my money as well as I will. Therefore at a young age I decided that I needed to become educated about investments. There was not much information a few decades ago, certainly no internet. Books about investing were horrendously expensive and in very limited locations. Basically I had to learn to take care of myself the hard way, by experience.

Today there is plenty of information. It is very easy to learn many different aspects of trading/investment, then test them and find most useless.

I don't know of anyone that has done well with the financial advice from the industry. I do know people that have lost a lot following advice.
If those that don't want to know much about their own money, just spent as much time on learning a little as they spend on their next car purchase, would quickly learn that buying an ETF like STW or AFI etc, adding every year or 2 with more savings, whenever there is a large pullback, or something like that, is going to earn them a LOT more than following some plan by a highly regulated FP, that as an average knows nothing about investing, but charges lots of fees.

Sorry, rant over.

 

[tech/a]

Oh My---Rant to continue!!!

Your adviser mates aren't very good at explaining what they do. A financial adviser is not an economist or a financial analyst. Playing around in stocks and commodity markets is a full time job - it's not what a financial adviser does and nor do they have time to dedicate to that sort of area.

Wow seriously?
If I was a 50-60 yrs old with $500,000 to $1,500,000 and a Financial planner told me this --- Id run and so should anyone else.

There are others who are great at developing their careers and growing their income over time, but are in occupations that are high-stress and time consuming - they don't have the drive or time to look after their financial affairs so they will outsource this to professionals. Doctors & surgeons are a classic example of this. They work long hours and earn great money, but then end up with very expensive lifestyles and plenty of debt, and don't even utilise basic tax planning or set aside cash to invest.

Your first Paragraph certainly doesn't describe a professional. I know 1 surgeon and 3 doctors male and female and all of them certainly know about tax and investing. They didn't get where they are from other peoples financial advice and they most certainly wouldn't trust a Dollar with someone who leases their Porsche, Rents their Mc Mansion and asks them their "Risk Tolerance". These are the Wannabe's that should be avoided at all costs---They want to be in the financial position their clients are!!

There are the ODD good advisers but they are as rare as a Trader that can turn a profit consistently, or a builder who turns a profit in boom OR bust, or a Business owner who consistently grows their business year in year out.

So what's wrong

Back to here----Playing around in stocks and commodity markets is a full time job - it's not what a financial adviser does and nor do they have time to dedicate to that sort of area.

If advising on Financial wealth creation and accumulation isn't the job of a financial adviser then they must be Managed Fund Sales people.
If that's the case then don't make yourself out to be an adviser in anything. Tell them as it is. You do anything other than sell managed funds and the managed funds that are held by your dealer principal.
Here is THE problem right here! They cant advise---they don't know what to advise. They aren't QUALIFIED to advise.
Qualified to me is being in a position where they are Financially secure for the rest of their life and a few other lives.

I know of people who have been talked into changing funds from Industry Funds to Financial Planners Managed funds which have historically done worse than the industry funds and continue to do so.
The F/P gets a fee from $500-1000 to do this plus his "Management fees' each year. He's not looking after YOU he's looking after only one person--guess who?

Lets determine your Risk profile

What's a stupid question/thing to do!

To any F/P How do YOU handle risk
Standard answer---diversification.
So dilution of potential profit = dilution of risk.
That's their idea of handling risk!---F33cking brilliant.

I don't know of anyone that has done well with the financial advice from the industry. I do know people that have lost a lot following advice.
If those that don't want to know much about their own money, just spent as much time on learning a little as they spend on their next car purchase, would quickly learn that buying an ETF like STW or AFI etc, adding every year or 2 with more savings, whenever there is a large pullback, or something like that, is going to earn them a LOT more than following some plan by a highly regulated FP, that as an average knows nothing about investing, but charges lots of fees.

Isn't that the truth.
One thing I definitely know.

Learn how to handle risk and you can maximize your return and minimize your exposure to risk. Well beyond any Financial planners profiling---infact you'll teach them something they NEED to know.

Im a duck and I know that investing in a maximum of 5 sound stocks like A2M,Breville (off the top of my head) and understanding how to manage the maximization of return on your trades while minimizing your risk
youll do infinitely better than any managed Fund a Financial Salesman puts you into.

If you can buy housing with rent paying your mortgage and its the worst house in the best street and you understood that the best money you'll make is in the front end in an area that's in or going to be in demand. Then Buy it!
If you have the capital, have a bent for calculation, do the hard yards discovering areas and agents in those areas who you can trust---develop a relationship with a good Project builder---do the math---all good--- start building and selling off plan!
OR
If your young Build 2 or 3 on a block live in one for a year---sell it--live in the other for a year---sell it---rinse and repeat.

If your in business or want to get into business
Dominate your field
Be different
Understand your margins
Instil passion.
Mediocre will return mediocre

Lastly if you do nothing else
Get yourself in a position where you DONT need a financial Advisor its not that hard ---a duck can do it!

For this duck most F/Ps rate as highly as the next get rich scheme.---zero.

 

[Junior]

Would quickly learn that buying an ETF like STW or AFI etc, adding every year or 2 with more savings, whenever there is a large pullback, or something like that, is going to earn them a LOT more than following some plan by a highly regulated FP, that as an average knows nothing about investing, but charges lots of fees.

Sorry, rant over.

A good adviser will include a simple strategy like the above as a part of their advice.

 

[Junior]

tech/a

The strategies you talk about require dedication, experience and commitment. I applaud you for taking control and for your success. You are in the small minority in this respect.

Would you recommend a portfolio of 5 small/micro cap stocks to someone seeking advice on what to do with their savings? Good luck with that, you are massively overestimating how the average person would handle even a small dip in the value of their capital. when a market meltdown hits, you will be sued.

To the average punter with kids, a mortgage and in a salaried job, if they can be set up so they are saving 20% of their net income and investing in managed funds, ETFs, shares or otherwise and a plan to be debt free well before retirement age - they will be far better off in the long run than someone with no advice.

The 'no advice' family will refinance back up to 80% to spend on holidays, reno', school fees and a new car every 5 years then start to panic at 55 years old when they realise there's still 20 years left on the home loan and bugger all in super.

I know you'll deride the above 2 scenarios but that's what reality for many folks!

The strategies you've outlined are great for someone willing to dedicate time and energy to really get ahead. Most will not do it, or often do not even have a basic grasp of mathematics to run the numbers.

Also re medicos, my comments are a generalisation. But the specialists I've dealt with work 70 hour weeks and spend no time on their finances. They rely heavily on an accountant for tax structuring and that's about it.

 

[tech/a]

tech/a

The strategies you talk about require dedication, experience and commitment.

Anything worth while does.

Would you recommend a portfolio of 5 small/micro cap stocks to someone seeking advice on what to do with their savings? Good luck with that, you are massively overestimating how the average person would handle even a small dip in the value of their capital. when a market meltdown hits, you will be sued.

No
Those I suggested would hardly be seen as Small caps.
Good luck suing anyone in a meltdown.

To the average punter with kids, a mortgage and in a salaried job, if they can be set up so they are saving 20% of their net income and investing in managed funds, ETFs, shares or otherwise and a plan to be debt free well before retirement age - they will be far better off in the long run than someone with no advice.

The average punter doesn't put away 20% of his earnings.
Its not advise on its own its the quality of the advice.

A bit of mine---
Learn to recognise opportunity
Learn what to do with it when you see it
THEN DO SOMETHING

The 'no advice' family will refinance back up to 80% to spend on holidays, reno', school fees and a new car every 5 years then start to panic at 55 years old when they realise there's still 20 years left on the home loan and bugger all in super.

Id rephrase that.
The live for NOW family---advice or no advice. 1000s of them.

I know you'll deride the above 2 scenarios but that's what reality for many folks!

The strategies you've outlined are great for someone willing to dedicate time and energy to really get ahead. Most will not do it, or often do not even have a basic grasp of mathematics to run the numbers.

Not only is it worth it in the long run but it alters the way you view life in the Now and the shorter term.
Its not all scrimp and save and when you do get out on the other side life takes on a whole new outlook
for you and everyone around you.
Evidently I'm in the .06% group of society and I didn't even pass year 11! My first job was pumping gas.
Maybe one person hears my message!

Also re medicos, my comments are a generalisation. But the specialists I've dealt with work 70 hour weeks and spend no time on their finances. They rely heavily on an accountant for tax structuring and that's about it.

Smart people employ smarter people!
F/As by and large don't fit in that category in my opinion.

 

[brty]

Junior,

A good adviser will include a simple strategy like the above as a part of their advice.

A good adviser would recommend people read at least a couple of good books to get themselves educated, even partially. However there is no profit, nor trailing fees in doing so.

It takes an absolute minimum of education, reading or whatever to find that first people need to start saving, then start investing. They will then ALWAYS be better off by implementing there own plan, being in charge of their own money, while continuing to learn.

Everyone learns and usually earns very little by having others doing the basic understanding for them.

I have too many relatives that have ignored what I have been saying to them for years about looking after their own money, while they sought 'professional' advise. All of them that sought professional advise are still struggling, the funds that they get put into all seem to suffer hugely with the various crashes that come along, and then never recover to just index performance. This occurred after the '87 crash and the '08 crash.

There are a couple of former 'niche' but highly regarded (at the time) financial advisers that on another forum (now closed) that I use to have very heated discussions about their 'free' advise, plus they ran courses etc (and had all the appropriate licenses), that put people into risky investments. I was threatened with legal action for calling their 'advise' risky, and eventually banned from that forum. Both ended up bankrupt and took many good peoples life savings away from them.
Remember they were widely regarded as 'good' and successful financial advisors.

I take it Junior you are in the industry, just from your comments, apologies if I'm incorrect.
Can you name any FP or adviser that has a stop loss on anything as part of the overall plan?

To the average punter with kids, a mortgage and in a salaried job, if they can be set up so they are saving 20% of their net income and investing in managed funds, ETFs, shares or otherwise and a plan to be debt free well before retirement age - they will be far better off in the long run than someone with no advice.

That is not the average couple with a couple of kids!!.
Anyone that is already saving 20% of their net income, already has some type of plan. They are already slightly educated and more likely to be working on their future. The last person they should go and see is some FP or advisor that takes a cut of their earnings, especially as most FP/advisers have not even got to that stage themselves!!

Just realised that Tech/A has noted exactly the same point!!

 

[Junior]

You guys are talking about advisers who drive around in a Porsche and recommend high-risk 'complex' investments for which they earn commissions.

These guys existed pre-2008 and fortunately most of them have been weeded out of the industry. They give the industry a bad name. It has and is changing significantly for the better. Commissions on investment products were banned in 2009, the banks are offloading and separating from financial advice due to the inherent conflict of interest in being an advice provider and product provider, and education standards for advisers have been raised significantly.

 

[tech/a]

You guys are talking about advisers who drive around in a Porsche and recommend high-risk 'complex' investments for which they earn commissions.

These guys existed pre-2008 and fortunately most of them have been weeded out of the industry. They give the industry a bad name. It has and is changing significantly for the better. Commissions on investment products were banned in 2009, the banks are offloading and separating from financial advice due to the inherent conflict of interest in being an advice provider and product provider, and education standards for advisers have been raised significantly.

Absolutely not.
These guys don't own a lot in particular the Porsche.
These are wanna be's

They believe that looking the part makes them the part.
They are nothing but Sales people
Selling Managed Funds.
While they may make investment Look complex
There is nothing complex about their planning.

education standards for advisers have been raised significantly

But they can still work under a dealer principal licence with very little educational requirement.

Simply
Get as much money into the Funds they are flogging for commission (Read Fee) and continued Advice.
The advice is a print out and risk evaluation questionnaire---That will be $500 thanks.

There are very few Solid Financial "Planners"

The industry is not in my view capable of guiding anyone toward financial freedom. Parking Funds sure.
Planning is limited to what you can do with the funds you now have.

Id have thought a good F/P could point you in the direction of opportunity OR if you thought you had found an opportunity --- guide you to what to do with it.

So in reality my expectations are wrong?

 

[tech/a]

I found this on the Web.

One of the best answers I have seen on the topic.



One way to get a sense is to look at this Certified Financial Planner topic list.

Another idea is to look at this book (my favorite I've read) which covers roughly a similar topic list in a concise form: http://www.amazon.com/Smart-Simple-Financial-Strategies-People/dp/0743269942 It could not hurt at all to read that before deciding to visit a planner, so you have baseline knowledge.

By the way, look for the CFP certification which is a generalist certification. A CFP might also have a deeper cert in certain topics or connect you with someone who does. For example:

• someone with a CPA or Enrolled Agent certification could help with taxes (note: your average tax prep place just has people who know how to type into the computer program, they have minimal expertise; a CPA or EA does have expertise)
• an estate planning lawyer would be an expert on setting up beneficiaries, writing your will, trusts, etc.
• a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) would be an investment expert
• there are insurance certifications and retirement plan certifications also
• there are garbage certifications that mean very little out there ... I've tried to mention some that mean something

You really want a generalist (CFP) who may have an additional credential as well. The idea is to holistically look at what you're trying to accomplish and all finance-related areas. Especially because there may be tradeoffs. The CFP would then refer you to or work with lawyers, accountants, etc.

Importantly, some advisors are fiduciaries (must act in your interests) and some are not. In particular many stockbrokers are neither qualified planners (no CFP or equivalent) nor are they fiduciaries. Stay away.

There are several models for paying a financial planner, including:

• loss-leader for an institution like Fidelity or Vanguard. If you have enough money with them they may give you free or discounted planning. They will of course always pick investments offered by their company, which is probably OK for say Vanguard and pretty bad for some other companies. Also this is probably on the phone, not in person, if that matters to you.
• commissions. (or a mix, "fee-based"). These planners are in part salespeople, for either investments or insurance or both. I'd stay away but some people are comfortable with it.
• percentage-of-assets fee-only. These planners get a fee from you, but as a percentage of investment assets managed. This creates an overemphasis on investing perhaps, though arguably an incentive not to lose your money, too. It also comes out to kind of a lot of money. One advantage is someone is doing rebalancing and other "investment maintenance" for you. This can be good if you lack the time and willpower, as many of us do.
• hourly fee-only. Like many lawyers and CPAs, just charge you for time spent. This money will be a more visible check you have to write but is probably cheaper than percentage of assets over time. But you don't have someone managing your money for you, this is more of a "get advice, then DIY" approach. There's a franchise Garrett Planning Network that has this kind of planner.

There's an organization called NAPFA (napfa.org) for fiduciary non-commission-based planners. Membership there is a good thing to look for since it's a third party that defines what fee-only means and requires the no-commissions/fiduciary standard.

Finally, the alternative I ended up choosing was to just take the CFP course myself. You can do it online via correspondence course, it costs about the same as 1 year of professional advice. I also took the exam, just to be sure I learned the stuff. This is the "extreme DIY" approach but it is cheaper over time and you know you are not going to defraud yourself. You still might do things that are counterproductive and not in your interests, but you know that already probably ;-) Anyway I think it's equivalent to about a quarter's worth of work at a decent college, or so. There are about 6 textbooks to dig through. You won't be an experienced expert at the end, but you'll know a lot. To get an actual CFP cert, you need 3 years experience on top of the courses and the exam - I haven't done that, just the book learning. Someone who puts "CFP" after their name will have the 3 years on top of the training.

Some editorial: many planners emphasize investing, and many people looking for planners (or books on finance) emphasize investing. This is a big mistake, in my view. Investing is more or less a commodity and you just need someone who won't screw it up, overcharge, and/or lose your money on something idiotic or inappropriate.

Some people are in plain-bad and inappropriate investments, don't get me wrong. But once you fix that and just get into anything decent, your biggest planning concerns are probably elsewhere.

• Some big picture understanding of your life goals and how money fits into them and what you need to do to get there.
• Few people are properly insured. (Disability, life, umbrella, etc.)
• Budgeting, spending, and saving.
• Estate plan, at least a will and setting up proper beneficiaries on retirement accounts and insurance policies. Especially if you have kids, this is must-do.
• Getting all the tax benefits you can, especially if self-employed or you own a business or real estate.

On investments, I'd look for a planner to just get you out of overpriced annuities and expensive mutual funds you may have been sold (anything you were sold by a salesperson is probably crap). And look for them to help you decide how much to invest, and how much in stocks vs. bonds. Those are the most important investment decisions

 

[Junior]

I found this on the Web.

One of the best answers I have seen on the topic.



One way to get a sense is to look at this Certified Financial Planner topic list.

Another idea is to look at this book (my favorite I've read) which covers roughly a similar topic list in a concise form: http://www.amazon.com/Smart-Simple-Financial-Strategies-People/dp/0743269942 It could not hurt at all to read that before deciding to visit a planner, so you have baseline knowledge.

By the way, look for the CFP certification which is a generalist certification. A CFP might also have a deeper cert in certain topics or connect you with someone who does. For example:

• someone with a CPA or Enrolled Agent certification could help with taxes (note: your average tax prep place just has people who know how to type into the computer program, they have minimal expertise; a CPA or EA does have expertise)
• an estate planning lawyer would be an expert on setting up beneficiaries, writing your will, trusts, etc.
• a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) would be an investment expert
• there are insurance certifications and retirement plan certifications also
• there are garbage certifications that mean very little out there ... I've tried to mention some that mean something

You really want a generalist (CFP) who may have an additional credential as well. The idea is to holistically look at what you're trying to accomplish and all finance-related areas. Especially because there may be tradeoffs. The CFP would then refer you to or work with lawyers, accountants, etc.

Importantly, some advisors are fiduciaries (must act in your interests) and some are not. In particular many stockbrokers are neither qualified planners (no CFP or equivalent) nor are they fiduciaries. Stay away.

There are several models for paying a financial planner, including:

• loss-leader for an institution like Fidelity or Vanguard. If you have enough money with them they may give you free or discounted planning. They will of course always pick investments offered by their company, which is probably OK for say Vanguard and pretty bad for some other companies. Also this is probably on the phone, not in person, if that matters to you.
• commissions. (or a mix, "fee-based"). These planners are in part salespeople, for either investments or insurance or both. I'd stay away but some people are comfortable with it.
• percentage-of-assets fee-only. These planners get a fee from you, but as a percentage of investment assets managed. This creates an overemphasis on investing perhaps, though arguably an incentive not to lose your money, too. It also comes out to kind of a lot of money. One advantage is someone is doing rebalancing and other "investment maintenance" for you. This can be good if you lack the time and willpower, as many of us do.
• hourly fee-only. Like many lawyers and CPAs, just charge you for time spent. This money will be a more visible check you have to write but is probably cheaper than percentage of assets over time. But you don't have someone managing your money for you, this is more of a "get advice, then DIY" approach. There's a franchise Garrett Planning Network that has this kind of planner.

There's an organization called NAPFA (napfa.org) for fiduciary non-commission-based planners. Membership there is a good thing to look for since it's a third party that defines what fee-only means and requires the no-commissions/fiduciary standard.

Finally, the alternative I ended up choosing was to just take the CFP course myself. You can do it online via correspondence course, it costs about the same as 1 year of professional advice. I also took the exam, just to be sure I learned the stuff. This is the "extreme DIY" approach but it is cheaper over time and you know you are not going to defraud yourself. You still might do things that are counterproductive and not in your interests, but you know that already probably ;-) Anyway I think it's equivalent to about a quarter's worth of work at a decent college, or so. There are about 6 textbooks to dig through. You won't be an experienced expert at the end, but you'll know a lot. To get an actual CFP cert, you need 3 years experience on top of the courses and the exam - I haven't done that, just the book learning. Someone who puts "CFP" after their name will have the 3 years on top of the training.

Some editorial: many planners emphasize investing, and many people looking for planners (or books on finance) emphasize investing. This is a big mistake, in my view. Investing is more or less a commodity and you just need someone who won't screw it up, overcharge, and/or lose your money on something idiotic or inappropriate.

Some people are in plain-bad and inappropriate investments, don't get me wrong. But once you fix that and just get into anything decent, your biggest planning concerns are probably elsewhere.

• Some big picture understanding of your life goals and how money fits into them and what you need to do to get there.
• Few people are properly insured. (Disability, life, umbrella, etc.)
• Budgeting, spending, and saving.
• Estate plan, at least a will and setting up proper beneficiaries on retirement accounts and insurance policies. Especially if you have kids, this is must-do.
• Getting all the tax benefits you can, especially if self-employed or you own a business or real estate.

On investments, I'd look for a planner to just get you out of overpriced annuities and expensive mutual funds you may have been sold (anything you were sold by a salesperson is probably crap). And look for them to help you decide how much to invest, and how much in stocks vs. bonds. Those are the most important investment decisions

Thanks Tech/a. This post articulates some of what I was unsuccessfully trying to communicate.

Financial Advice in Australia is not just about investment advice.

With regards to CFP:

Post-grad Financial Planning qualification will be compulsory for all new advisers from 2019, and for existing advisers by 2024. This is the point I have been trying to convey.....things are changing!!

In Australia, to gain entry into CFP you must already have completed a Business undergrad degree with FP major, OR another degree + Graduate Diploma in FP. CFP is tougher than you may think, and Investment Planning is not the key focus. The information you have posted above is in the States, so it differs a bit there.

All advisers are now required by law to put the interests of their client ahead of their own. i.e. we have the fiduciary duty here.

 

[tech/a]

This is excellent.

So brty and the duck aren't the only ones to recognise
the need for a massive change. Currently any idiot can find a dealer
principal and operate under them calling themselves a Financial Planner/Adviser

There is a place for experts.
But this industry is rife with incompetence.
Hopefully that will change.

Even so The course cannot replace experience.

Frankly I cant see a well heeled 60 yrs old sitting in front of an F/A who is qualified because he has passed the above course, seeking advise on how to place his $1-2 million.
Joe Bloggs who has placed his funds into XYZ Industry Fund may get some benefit in specific areas.
But those with SMSF wouldn't get a great deal from someone who has done the course. They got there doing things in their Super Far differently than those would advise----after doing the course.
Again personal opinon.

 

[brty]

Junior, you seem to be confirming that FP in the past was really bad, hence why things are changing in the industry.

Why will the changes make things any better? Just because people have a piece of paper from a university or a second one, does not necessarily add one iota about how to make money through trading/investing and setting themselves up for later in life.

A close mate who is a FP and principal of his firm, can hardly wait to get out of the system (sell his business) because of all the new rules and regs that basically stop him from giving anyone good "real" advise.

I notice you totally avoided the questions about giving people a book list to read/study and advice about a stop loss on investments.

Changing the industry is admittance there is a lot wrong with it!!

Great post Tech/A, nice simple book that should be what FP/advisers suggest people go and read.
I very much liked this in the summary.........
"To start with, she tells you to forget all the complicated stuff the financial industry sells. You don't need it, it costs too much, and some of it is downright bad. It's designed to make the banks, brokers, and insurance companies rich, not you."

 

[Junior]

This is excellent.

So brty and the duck aren't the only ones to recognise
the need for a massive change. Currently any idiot can find a dealer
principal and operate under them calling themselves a Financial Planner/Adviser

There is a place for experts.
But this industry is rife with incompetence.
Hopefully that will change.

Even so The course cannot replace experience.

Frankly I cant see a well heeled 60 yrs old sitting in front of an F/A who is qualified because he has passed the above course, seeking advise on how to place his $1-2 million.
Joe Bloggs who has placed his funds into XYZ Industry Fund may get some benefit in specific areas.
But those with SMSF wouldn't get a great deal from someone who has done the course. They got there doing things in their Super Far differently than those would advise----after doing the course.
Again personal opinon.

Tech/a, I'm not suggesting the course alone is sufficient. A good mentor and experience is also required.

 

[tech/a]

Personally I think there should be a course which all students do in Year 10
That early because those who need it most will be those who make year 10,11,12
and then leave school. It should be compulsory and pepped up so it ISNT
boring. Real live examples and studies the best being their OWN homes.

Their own personal budgets and planning.
Run a 12 mth paper of their own situation
and base it against a benchmark. disclosed
at the end of the year.
.
Clearly more advanced subjects past year 10.

Educate the population so they can better select and discuss their own
circumstances.

 

[Cam019]

Interesting to see all the comments here. I am currently completing a Bachelors degree with majors in financial planning and economics and the following link will give a good outline of how the industry is changing and and the education requirements of not only new entrants entering the industry (me in 2019), but also the education requirements of all existing financial advisers. Soon to be gone are the days where a Diploma or Advanced Diploma of FP is all that is required for entry into the industry.