Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,371
- Reactions
- 9,536
Storm Financial Group
- Thread starter Garpal Gumnut
- Start date
About 15 years ago a bloke I know became a financial planner/investment adviser with Westpac. He’d had no previous experience in that field – Westpac put him through a course lasting about four weeks, at the end of which time he was supposedly qualified to advise people on how to invest their money. Although Westpac called him a financial planner, he was barely involved in most of the usual services provided by financial planners – basically he was just a commission salesman for Westpac’s financial products. In that respect I guess he wasn’t much different to Storm’s advisers who masqueraded as financial planners, but were in fact just selling a product and, presumably, getting a cut of the 7% upfront fee.
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
Thanks Jifromoz for posting the the link. When I visited the site, at first I thought I had landed on Dymphna Boholt's site but I was mistaken.
I'm attempting to gain an understanding of what Jodie Nolan/McIvor is actually offering. What does the EQUIS Group do ? I note on their website it states that they are "a highly professional, affordable and unique education facility for people who are keen to learn more about money but unsure of who to trust, where to start or where to go to source credible, reliable information"
I'd be interested to know more about this group. Currently it appears that the public faces are Jodie Nolan and Leonie Duck, who I believe was has a Bachelor of Economics from University of Newcastle and who has also previously held the position of a Business Analyst for Optus.
On Jodie Nolan's website it states she is an author, speaker and educator and is
"a mother of two, author and financial advisor with over 15 years of experience lost her millions in Australia's largest financial collapse. She has learnt to rebuild her wealth and is empowering others with knowledge about money management with her book 'Surviving the Storm'.
Surviving the Storm provides the building blocks to help Australian families, women, singles and retirees re-build their wealth or start from scratch. It offers advice and tips from an expert who has experienced both sides of the fence - great wealth and financial loss. This easy to read book provides a very real account of money management in today's world"
I wonder if Jodie Nolan currently holds an AFS Licence or is an AFS Authorised Representative ? Now that Jodie Nolan has recently been studying for a Masters of Applied Finance from QUT in Brisbane, I wonder if she will freely share her knowledge with the other Storm victims?
Wouldn't it be a noble gesture to assist all the Stormers to get back on their feet and after experiencing the disaster first hand, I wonder if she will freely help the Stormers to "re-build their wealth or start from scratch"
I'm deeply involved in another programme of works at the moment so I'm a little time poor. But I would definitely like a bit more background on this group, I might just ask for the assistance from one of my colleagues. I do get somewhat amazed that some of the most notable wealth creation operations I have seen, after Townsville, seem to reside on the Sunshine Coast of Queensland.
S
Jodie McIver/Nolan must have only changed her name recently. I recall looking at her website not too long before Christmas and it was McIver then. I made appoint of going back over the old Storm website and seeing what the "advisers" are now doing.
Me, I would think any advice from someone who thought double gearing was an appropriate strategy for mum and dad investors should be taken with a grain of salt.
Me, I would think any advice from someone who thought double gearing was an appropriate strategy for mum and dad investors should be taken with a grain of salt.
Tough day at the office Frank?
I was almost too frustrated to even bother with this but here goes:
I am pretty bloody sure that my entire post talks about imprudent lending being punished. Lets Check shall we -
"Any illegal lending for whatever reason whether it be incorrect assessment, inflated house price, fudged up income will need to be addressed. Retirees, low income earners etc should expect to get something back."
"Those not working - the banks need to fix."
I am also VERY sure that your obsession with your own situation clouds your ability to look at Storm from a distance. Almost every bank in Australia had exposure to Storm in some fashion. Although the push was to use CBA Townsville and BOQ North Ward where possible (and I am not arguing these two "branches" have much to answer for) to speed up the approval process, MANY clients chose to keep their existing bank relationships with ANZ, Westpac, whoever.
So get off your high horse about the fact that there is UMIS and Storm in bed with banks and everything else. The courts will decide whether CBA and BOQ have a case to answer on the home loan side. Just because ASIC lays charges doesn't show squat. ASIC laying charges is basically a massive "please explain" notice. It shows they have looked at it and they don't like it but if the banks can show nothing untoward occurred or that Storm clients were not treated differently then it will be dropped. I hope it isn't but for goodness sakes don't assume just becuase it is going to court there is an automatic assumption of guilt.
I suggest you start taking your own advice and be specific. If you think CBA has done wrong, say that. Generalising the "Banks" is BS.
Next -
Now lets go back to my post and look AGAIN at my example.
"I would love to know the figures on how many of the 3-4000 stormified clients were still employed, earning incomes that could support the base loans taken out. These clients took on risk by borrowing against their homes.
Result - Those working, with incomes to support their base loans should not be bailed out.
Those who did not borrow against homes and had a simple margin loan structure supported by a non borrowed asset base should not be bailed out - they should however be bought back to a situation that reflects being sold out at 80% LVR - the point a non storm client would have been sold out in the same situation."
FRANK - Please answer these questions
A client with no home loan and $50K of savings goes to Storm. Storm arrange everything and that money is geared at 50% with a margin loan. The clients goes on the ride, gets the margin call later than they should have but is sold out and receives about $4K back at the end after the loan is repaid.
What was done by the banks that was illegal? Should that client get all their money back and if you say YES, justify that.
Client 2 - works in the mines - earns about $150K pa or about $9K per month after tax. Is 47 years old. Has a unit and a house but neither and real nice because up until a couple of years ago it was all about lifestyle and holidays. The properties were just for a tax deduction. They are paid off and worth about $600K between them. Goes to Storm and borrows $480,000 from his usual bank against the properties. Takes out a margin loan as well and gets into the market. Goes on the ride and loses the lot.
He can easily afford the loan repayments.
Is this imprudent lending? Was his bank who didn't have a close relationship with Storm to know what he planned to do with the money or was it ok to lend to him based on his ability to repay?
I hope I have made my point. NOT ALL LENDING WAS IMPRUDENT.
Now we know that some of the borrowing against the home was not imprudent and we already know that NONE of the margin loans were imprudent because ALL of the margin loans had capital to back them we can get a better idea about how many Storm clients were screwed by the banks.
Was there imprudent lending - ABSOLUTELY. Were some of the bank branches in bed with Storm - YES, but for the sake of everyone stop the tirade against "BANKS"
Trust me, from someone who is working with ex Stormies who can still re-build and who were put back 10-15 years because of the risks in the strategy but certainly met EVERY lending criteria in the book your generalisations about every loan offered to Storm clients to be illegal is wrong.
Your doctors case is an example of margin lending LVRs going awry. I don't think ANYONE on the forum disagrees with the fact that ALL clients should be bought back to a position in which the margin loan should have been triggered at the right time.
Any client who argues they could have dropped more money in and stayed invested I have this to say - "What was stopping them taking the cash and re-investing in another index fund the next day?
Result - Those working, with incomes to support their base loans should not be bailed out.
Those who did not borrow against homes and had a simple margin loan structure supported by a non borrowed asset base should not be bailed out - they should however be bought back to a situation that reflects being sold out at 80% LVR - the point a non storm client would have been sold out in the same situation.
I was almost too frustrated to even bother with this but here goes:
I am pretty bloody sure that my entire post talks about imprudent lending being punished. Lets Check shall we -
"Any illegal lending for whatever reason whether it be incorrect assessment, inflated house price, fudged up income will need to be addressed. Retirees, low income earners etc should expect to get something back."
"Those not working - the banks need to fix."
I am also VERY sure that your obsession with your own situation clouds your ability to look at Storm from a distance. Almost every bank in Australia had exposure to Storm in some fashion. Although the push was to use CBA Townsville and BOQ North Ward where possible (and I am not arguing these two "branches" have much to answer for) to speed up the approval process, MANY clients chose to keep their existing bank relationships with ANZ, Westpac, whoever.
So get off your high horse about the fact that there is UMIS and Storm in bed with banks and everything else. The courts will decide whether CBA and BOQ have a case to answer on the home loan side. Just because ASIC lays charges doesn't show squat. ASIC laying charges is basically a massive "please explain" notice. It shows they have looked at it and they don't like it but if the banks can show nothing untoward occurred or that Storm clients were not treated differently then it will be dropped. I hope it isn't but for goodness sakes don't assume just becuase it is going to court there is an automatic assumption of guilt.
I suggest you start taking your own advice and be specific. If you think CBA has done wrong, say that. Generalising the "Banks" is BS.
Next -
Now lets go back to my post and look AGAIN at my example.
"I would love to know the figures on how many of the 3-4000 stormified clients were still employed, earning incomes that could support the base loans taken out. These clients took on risk by borrowing against their homes.
Result - Those working, with incomes to support their base loans should not be bailed out.
Those who did not borrow against homes and had a simple margin loan structure supported by a non borrowed asset base should not be bailed out - they should however be bought back to a situation that reflects being sold out at 80% LVR - the point a non storm client would have been sold out in the same situation."
FRANK - Please answer these questions
A client with no home loan and $50K of savings goes to Storm. Storm arrange everything and that money is geared at 50% with a margin loan. The clients goes on the ride, gets the margin call later than they should have but is sold out and receives about $4K back at the end after the loan is repaid.
What was done by the banks that was illegal? Should that client get all their money back and if you say YES, justify that.
Client 2 - works in the mines - earns about $150K pa or about $9K per month after tax. Is 47 years old. Has a unit and a house but neither and real nice because up until a couple of years ago it was all about lifestyle and holidays. The properties were just for a tax deduction. They are paid off and worth about $600K between them. Goes to Storm and borrows $480,000 from his usual bank against the properties. Takes out a margin loan as well and gets into the market. Goes on the ride and loses the lot.
He can easily afford the loan repayments.
Is this imprudent lending? Was his bank who didn't have a close relationship with Storm to know what he planned to do with the money or was it ok to lend to him based on his ability to repay?
I hope I have made my point. NOT ALL LENDING WAS IMPRUDENT.
Now we know that some of the borrowing against the home was not imprudent and we already know that NONE of the margin loans were imprudent because ALL of the margin loans had capital to back them we can get a better idea about how many Storm clients were screwed by the banks.
Was there imprudent lending - ABSOLUTELY. Were some of the bank branches in bed with Storm - YES, but for the sake of everyone stop the tirade against "BANKS"
Trust me, from someone who is working with ex Stormies who can still re-build and who were put back 10-15 years because of the risks in the strategy but certainly met EVERY lending criteria in the book your generalisations about every loan offered to Storm clients to be illegal is wrong.
Your doctors case is an example of margin lending LVRs going awry. I don't think ANYONE on the forum disagrees with the fact that ALL clients should be bought back to a position in which the margin loan should have been triggered at the right time.
Any client who argues they could have dropped more money in and stayed invested I have this to say - "What was stopping them taking the cash and re-investing in another index fund the next day?
Result - Those working, with incomes to support their base loans should not be bailed out.
Those who did not borrow against homes and had a simple margin loan structure supported by a non borrowed asset base should not be bailed out - they should however be bought back to a situation that reflects being sold out at 80% LVR - the point a non storm client would have been sold out in the same situation.
- Joined
- 2 June 2011
- Posts
- 5,341
- Reactions
- 242
Apparently she is in her final year of her Masters, according to her LinkedIn profile. Maybe the student should wait until she's done with Uni before she starts doling out folksy homespun financial advice. I wonder what she got her undergrad degree in. The admission requirements are reassuring:
http://www.qut.edu.au/study/courses/master-of-business/master-of-business-applied-finance
Looking at the course subjects it seems like B Comm light (first and second year subjects).
Education standards
I will try to keep this simple.
In the bad old days not unlike most industries there was bugger all. The whole weeties pack analogy is pretty close. It was mostly ex insurance guys looking to expand their books + a smattering of bank advisers.
Now is a little different. There are a couple of ways to go:
1. Dimploma - broken into 2 parts - Diploma of Financial Services - 4 (yes 4) subjects. This believe it or not allows a licencee to put you in front of clients if they want.
Subjects are: Foundations of FP, Risk Management, Investment Planning 1, Super and Retirement.
Some pretty massive holes there. You get a few of the banks who are looking to "churn and burn" who will put people with only this in front of clients as they are kept on a tight leash and as discussed are basically form completers and sales people at heart.
You can then take a crack at Advanced Diploma of FS
3 additional subjects - Tax and Estate, Complex FP, The professional adviser. You also need to cover some more in an "elective"
OPTION 2
Get a degree (commerce, business) with a major in Fin Planning.
From there you need higher ed (post grad) to get into the CFP (certified fin planner) program. This used to be just more subjects but now I think you need the Masters which is where the applied finance comes in.
There is currently no difference between the terms adviser and planner. There is talk of this changing so "adviser" is seen as someone who actually gives full advice rather than the sales team at a bank.
My opinion - the system is getting better but is still poor. I know how little I knew initially from the study side and it was only years of researching and writing plans for other advisers well before getting anywhere near a client that meant I knew what I was talking about.
Mind you I still cringe whenever I look at how easy it is to become a teacher considering the importance of that "profession" as well.
To me, time in industry should be an automatic, a bit like a lawyer doing their time or a doctor on prac. Minimum 2 years.
We also have ongoing education the same as most industries. Not exactly stressful though.
I will try to keep this simple.
In the bad old days not unlike most industries there was bugger all. The whole weeties pack analogy is pretty close. It was mostly ex insurance guys looking to expand their books + a smattering of bank advisers.
Now is a little different. There are a couple of ways to go:
1. Dimploma - broken into 2 parts - Diploma of Financial Services - 4 (yes 4) subjects. This believe it or not allows a licencee to put you in front of clients if they want.
Subjects are: Foundations of FP, Risk Management, Investment Planning 1, Super and Retirement.
Some pretty massive holes there. You get a few of the banks who are looking to "churn and burn" who will put people with only this in front of clients as they are kept on a tight leash and as discussed are basically form completers and sales people at heart.
You can then take a crack at Advanced Diploma of FS
3 additional subjects - Tax and Estate, Complex FP, The professional adviser. You also need to cover some more in an "elective"
OPTION 2
Get a degree (commerce, business) with a major in Fin Planning.
From there you need higher ed (post grad) to get into the CFP (certified fin planner) program. This used to be just more subjects but now I think you need the Masters which is where the applied finance comes in.
There is currently no difference between the terms adviser and planner. There is talk of this changing so "adviser" is seen as someone who actually gives full advice rather than the sales team at a bank.
My opinion - the system is getting better but is still poor. I know how little I knew initially from the study side and it was only years of researching and writing plans for other advisers well before getting anywhere near a client that meant I knew what I was talking about.
Mind you I still cringe whenever I look at how easy it is to become a teacher considering the importance of that "profession" as well.
To me, time in industry should be an automatic, a bit like a lawyer doing their time or a doctor on prac. Minimum 2 years.
We also have ongoing education the same as most industries. Not exactly stressful though.
What is your opinion of CFPs who were gifted the status simply by being long term planners? Surely this needs to be reviewed to reflect the time and effort that recent CFP attainees have put in..
It probably does need to be reviewed but at least the planners in that situation have been in the game 15+ years since certainly for the past 10+ years the CFP has involved at least the 5 extra subjects and more recently the post grad.
Industry experience does count for a bit - study isn't the be all always.
Those who were gifted the title are most likely the ones who will be exiting the industry in the next 5-10 years so by default they will disappear.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Thanks for the explanation, doobsy. About how many hours of study would the Diploma of Fin. Services take? I have a vague recollection of a previous discussion on the topic suggesting the qualifying exam was in the form of multiple choice answers.
Do you know if that's right?
Again, approx how many hours of study to complete this Advanced bit?
No idea Julia - Full time no distractions the first 4 could be probably knocked over easily in 6 months. Fair bit of reading plus an assignment for each. Last time I checked it was multi choice.
Advanced takes a bit more but 3 subjects might take 2-6 months each depending. There is an 8th subject which is putting together a full plan and presenting it on video and most people fail this I think since you are expected to be SO compliant that alot of people miss things. I think that should be an indicator they are not ready but I think you can re-submit within 2 months.
Overall - Full Time study might be 18 months, part time - 3 years.
Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,371
- Reactions
- 9,536
Thanks Julia and doobsy.
So what I'm hearing is that it takes longer to become a Financial Planner than it takes to train as a dog groomer, but not as long as it takes to become a Barber.
Would that be correct?
No wonder the Storm investors are getting upset with the advice they got from their advisers.
gg
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Re Jodie Nolan: I was curious enough to have a look at her website. In particular I wanted to see what the "Equis Group" offered.
Multiple attempts to access various links to this part of Ms Nolan's business have elicited "Page Not Found".
I have sent her an email, expressing interest in knowing more about the content of her workshops, and their cost. So far she has not replied.
Anyone been able to access the Equis link?
Multiple attempts to access various links to this part of Ms Nolan's business have elicited "Page Not Found".
I have sent her an email, expressing interest in knowing more about the content of her workshops, and their cost. So far she has not replied.
Anyone been able to access the Equis link?
Got in the other day
Since the apple never falls far - she is charging $83 per person per seminar. From what I can see ALL of the information is information easily accessible. As she is no longer interested in giving personal advice (that involves getting a licence) she is keeping it generic and I have copied below the text about the seminars.
Would be cheaper to go out and buy a Noel Whittikar or Paul Clitheroe book.
Mind you if she is running 1 per fortnight and can get 50 bodies through the door then she is making $107,900 out of the seminar series. Flog them the book while there and it probably is pretty easy money considering there is no personalised advice, no tricky technical or strategic discussions.
Workshops
Living Smart - Things you ‘need to know’ about money
A smart place to start on your quest for credible financial information, Living Smart - The things you need to know about money - is an essential 2 hour workshop for anyone who has ever wanted to understand the fundamentals of finance and how to easily apply them to your life. You can expect to learn the key principles, facts and skills behind cash-flow and debt management, understanding investments like shares and property, superannuation strategies and tax minimisation, just to name a few. This knowledge is non-biased, accurate and designed to give you the edge in developing an excellent financial outlook. A must for anyone from the ‘young achievers’ to the ‘young at heart’, this workshop is the cornerstone of all financial workshops and most of our attendees agree ‘ this stuff should be taught in schools’. After only 2 hours you will be armed with the practical information to make significant changes to improve your money situation.
Retiring Smart - The things you ‘need to know’ about retirement
Providing income for retirement regardless of your age or situation is a daunting process for most people however in this 2 hour workshop you will discover how straightforward it is to understand the financial facts to retirement. From self-funded situations to navigating the Centrelink and Tax issues, you will have a better understanding of the right questions to ask in order to save for, plan and implement your own retirement income streams.
Start Smart - Things young achievers ‘need to know’ about money
A smart place to start for the future leaders of our country! Start Smart - The things ‘Young Achievers’ need to know about money is an essential 2 hour workshop for ages 16-25. Ideal for those Gen Y go-getters who are keen to get the head start in their financial future the workshops are designed to provide easy, practical information on issues that affect Gen Y right now. We often hear:” Why isn’t this stuff taught in school?” So with this in mind, you will learn the fundamentals of money (that those older than you, wish they knew earlier!) and how to apply them to your life without sacrificing your current lifestyle.
Smart Business - Financial things you ‘need to know’ about small business
A priority workshop for small to medium business owners who are keen to better understand their financial situation, improve ongoing cashflow and source potential financial opportunities within their existing business. Often business owners spend more time ‘in’ their business and not enough time ‘on’ their business so the opportunity to spend 2 hours understanding financial statements, breakeven and profit projections, cash-flow and marketing is much needed to enhance their productivity, and ultimately maximise their bottom line.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
That's not expensive and I can see a real market for what she's offering.
Agree that it's very basic stuff that you'd assume most people would learn for themselves, but this thread is a clear indication that they don't.
Thanks for copying it for us, doobsy.
Agree that it's very basic stuff that you'd assume most people would learn for themselves, but this thread is a clear indication that they don't.
Thanks for copying it for us, doobsy.
One thing this Jodie Nolan woman has discovered from her Storm experience is that there are plenty of people who will pay money to be told what they want to hear.
This was the cornerstone of the Cassamatis success - tell people what they want to hear, train up a team of advisers to do the same, charge big money for the service, and package it up as safe and conservative financial planning advice.
You can be sure this woman will crank up her prices once she builds up a decent amount of custom. She'll soon have a devoted following from people who prefer to let others think for them rather than thinking for themselves.
She'll do well.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
If she's going to do well, she'll need to start answering emails, particularly those asking why they cannot access information about her actual product.
- Joined
- 21 December 2008
- Posts
- 4,532
- Reactions
- 1
bunyip
To me, this flags the issue of that fine line between, "education", general advice and specific advice. Might be worth dropping a line to Greg Medcraft for some clarity.
S
