- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
Fear and despair where did that come from?
They were spouting, healthy returns on long term investments....
Clownsville? I live in brisbane thanks......
Way back in October, the world WAS a different place, lets not forget that!
1 post, no idea of the situation, obviously have not read the entire thread..
Bad comment, poor form....
No one was greedy investing with storm, infact the majority of people who are in the situation, as with myself and steve reynolds (a long time personal friend of myself) were trying to sell out on many occasions, but were stalled or blocked by storm.... we were trying to sell at a loss, to minimise further damages, is that greedy? yet we were stalled until we were in negative equity... would you not be crying a bit if your advisor was telling you one thing but the outcome is another...
I will never trust another Financial advisor again, as with many others... however if you think were just whinning and think storm is a good company let me know I would be happy to refer you to my advisor...
the reason I am posting here, is to let as many people know what storm are, I feel it morally important for me to at least try and stop this ever happening to another person.....
Spot on daisy. I agree and personally find that the general tone of comment and discussion on this trajedy is "silly fool you; I would never have done that". Lack of life experience and ego driven naivety seems to be alive and well.I am so sick of hearing the word greed being associated with the poor people who have lost everything because of Storm. Retirees who were only trying to set themselves up for self sufficiency and a comfortable retirement have lost everything. Don’t people think they are already going through enough mental anguish without heaping more coals on their heads? Whenever someone does that they betray their own lack of compassion and empathy. All these poor people are guilty of is the fear that the politicians created back then, naivety and lack of experience.
If you are criticising storm members for their naivity you have to remember that if you are a member of this forum then you likely to be fairly pro-active and self educated towards investment. Not all people are as savvy and therefore go to an advisor. They are scared about investing in the sharemarket and wouldn't do it alone, so they take the 'safer' option of going through an advisor. Why not go through the biggest and most prominent advisor in town?
I keep reading this sort of comment.
How can they stop you? ... Unless you were tied up with contracts through banks or storm.
Why didn't this ring bells for you?
I wonder what is the real reason Comm Bank dumped them...?
Yeah, that's a good question. Can anyone enlighten me on what happened here?
Surely the same reason ANZ dumped OPUS,
They ( Storm) were into margin and to protect their (CBA) secured debt
Surely the same reason ANZ dumped OPUS,
They ( Storm) were into margin and to protect their (CBA) secured debt
On behalf of my industry I most sincerely apologise that you have been treated in such a fashion.
Now for a bit of a rant but not aimed at Financial Planners as such. I understand that this mob was proposing to float on the ASX (heaven forbid) but got nowhere as the institutions were not, to put it mildly, impressed with the model proposed. Now this is where I have a problem. If that was the case where were the ethics of fund managers or the FPA, assuming it was aware of the float, the model and Storm itself, in not shouting from the rooftops that it was trash and clients involved in such aggressive gearing were going to get burnt. You know, you do not need Government legislation such as the FSRA, if the relevant associations just got in and hammered the cowboys. Indeed, what is the point of having industry associations if they don't do that. I know, I know, the usual arguments trotted out is that we are not law enforcers and we cannot be everywhere at once, blah, blah, blah and the other arguments are that these associations are only in it for themselves and stuff the client.
If these bodies were run along the ethical lines such as displayed by Bruce Teele and his counterparts at other major listed investment companies and they stuck to it through thick and thin, I believe you would find that onerous regulation on the industry, and the subsequent flow on of compliance costs to the client (IT''S OUR MONEY OR HAVE YOU PHUCKING FORGOTTEN THAT?), would be reduced considerably and that the reputation of the industry would be enhanced.
Maybe this will help:
http://www.investordaily.com.au/cps...utm_medium=email&rdeCOQ=SID-3F579BCE-6FD1C182
:swear:
The penny has dropped. I was under the impression that the margin loans were against blue chip shares, obviously the debt was against the Storm company
Bob
And in this last above, they were no different from any of many FP's and commentators saying the same.I started to invest with storm at age 23 (now 30) to help self fund my retirment, and generally make life easier in the future, I DID NOT draw an income of any kind from my investment.. This was my first investment of any kind, and I openly admit I was naive and did not know much, this been the main factor to why I was paying for advice and managment rather than doing it myself....
The high leverage, that people claim we were set up with is not entirely true, if I remember correctly my initial LVI was 50-55%, as the market began to tip I noticed this changing, I asked the questions.... and was assured that we would be safe, and considering I was in it for retirement and not short term gains, it would be unwise to sell out... And it was specifically stated that storm did not operate in this manner, as it was not effecient to try and pick the top and bottoms of spikes and falls, and selling and buying would be a costly excersise..
Are you keeping notes of these dates and advice given?As the LVI grew higher and higher and repeatedly asked about selling, and at one point contacted challenger, who explained to me I must go through storm fo rany dealings, Storm continued with the advice that things were safe and that in time markets would return...
I had a face to face update with my advisor late october, I asked for an exact figure of when I would be in margin call, and he explained that I had nothing to worry about as that could not happen, and an exact figure would be hard to calculate, I had a rough idea, and asked if I was already in Margin call... The reply was NO!, I recieved a phone call 5weeks later from macquarie explaining that I had been in margin call from the 5th of oct.
I haven't suggested any of you have been 'greedy'. Credit is due to you for trying to secure your financial future originally. I previously asked if some investors had been motivated by not enough income on a day to day basis.Hindsight is 20/20, I should have got seperate advice, should have forced them to sell etc. etc.. but I was investing through an advisor who was giving me false and misleading info, not to mention lying to me about my margin...
So, now.... I ask, can you explain how I was been greedy?
You'd have to hope so. Probably some fine print to exclude them from ultimate responsibility. You'd need legal advice on this, I suppose.I was following advice I paid for, are they not liable in some fashion for what they have done?
Yes by the way, alarm bells were ringing, and I agree I am partly to blame for the extent of the losses, but when you are been advised... well do I have to go on?
Is the finance industry regulated in anyway to control this sort of activity?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?