The Sharemarket College

[RT14]

After losing into the tens of thousands of bucks 'learning' from the SMC, it is about time I came clean and aired dirty laundry! After a quick google search of the SMC I now see that the Rogers family are trying to get business from China (http://translate.google.com.au/tran...ool/aus/sharemarket/training.html&prev=search)

Nice buildings but the campus I went to was nothing like that. They must all make so much money using Jason's 'magic wand!' :-/

I want to let everyone know of the tax problems I have had recently. I was sold the education on the basis of funding through my Superannuation account once a self managed super fund was made with Jill. This is illegal under ATO Regulation my friends and the SMC has been reported. This experience cost me so much money and this does not help because I have a heart problem!

These people are not good.

 

[cfdhunter]

Hi everyone. It's interesting that several of you have brought up the "magic wand". My wife noticed that last night and brought it to my attention as it was something that the telemarketer said to us about the training course.

 

[Ruby]

It doesn't really paint a very professional picture of the Sharemarket College, does it. It sounds as though they should be sprinkling star dust around. From now on I shall think of Jason as the Wonder Wand Waver!!

 

[SMCComs]

Hi all. By way of introduction, I’m in a senior position with The Sharemarket College. I know the business pretty well and I am well acquainted with its systems, products and services.

After long and careful consideration of the contents of this thread, including some well-intentioned but poorly executed attempts to deal with it in the past, and considering the commercial implications of its impact on the views and confidence of prospective SMC Members, we have decided that the only way to approach this matter is with openness and transparency to address the matters that have been raised in this thread.

We are of the view that Forums like this one are an excellent resource for people looking for information and knowledge. We embrace the potential for people with experience and expertise to assist others new to a field. We think that shared experience can be a valuable resource when people are responsible in the manner in which opinions are expressed and mature in their approach.

It is with this as a background that I have set out in this post what I hope is a comprehensive response to as many of the issues as I have been able to identify after a detailed reading of every post in the thread. I may not address each post individually, and it is not the intention to attack or single out any particular Forum Member, but where there has been a theme or recurring concern I have endeavoured to provide as complete a response as possible as well as address specific comments where I thought it necessary. If anyone feels the need to further comment I trust that those comments or questions can be raised in a dispassionate and fair manner and in the spirit with which this post has been made. I hope that basic standards of civility and professionalism can be maintained.

Personally, I think that given the highly inflammatory and frequently misleading and deceptive nature of the posts in this thread (as dealt with below), it should be closed for further comment at the very least. That’s not to stifle further discussion, that’s because I don’t see how further to’ing and fro’ing can add anything of value. Allegations have been made and answered. End of story. I request the Site Admin to consider this given that our attempts to have the offensive posts removed has been met with minimal success. And there are quite a few offensive posts, as I have set out below, together with detailed reasons for our objection to them. Most of them go well beyond any reasonable person’s view of fair comment or opinion. I acknowledge that some few posts have been removed but only those that were such utterly blatant commercial sabotage, defamation and lies that I’m sure Blind Freddy would have fled in terror from the consequences of continuing to publish them. What remains is, in many cases, barely, marginally, different. In many cases it is just as bad as what has been removed.

As I have communicated to Forum Admin in various emails, it is our belief that the only decent and right thing to do is to remove the entire thread. It is too riddled with inaccuracy, outright lies, misleading and deceptive statements and defamatory comments to be effectively “corrected”. The thread as a whole, due to the way in which it has evolved and the specific content in it, represents a false and misleading position and leaves the clear impression that SMC is dishonest, incompetent, greedy and lacking in integrity. Amongst other things.

It was suggested to us to post a response, which is what we are doing. As any reasonable person would be well aware, however, the flip side is that such a rebuttal will just raise the profile of this thread on this site and in search results and runs a real risk of making matters worse. What’s more, a response from us doesn’t make the lies and misrepresentations invisible, they will still be found and there is little assurance that our response, at the end of the thread, would even be read or seen. From our own enquiries, most people who have seen the thread only read a few posts, skip around to see what they are saying and then walk away.

So my request to the Forum Admin was that, after reading and considering the contents of my email (which was on substantially similar terms to this post), to respond and let me know if there was still a view that the posts and the thread as a whole represents a fair, accurate and reasonable position free from inflammatory and defamatory statements and implications and which is not misleading or deceptive in the impression it leaves of our Business. I asked to be informed of whether Admin's stance would be maintained - that it is all just fair comment and opinion and that we should either ignore it and unruffle our feathers or post a response and risk a greater conflagration with more insulting and false claims. I received a detailed response that, whilst it went some small way to addressing our significant concerns as explained above, does not address the core issues in a way we find to be reasonable or acceptable. That leaves us with this option of posting a response.

In terms of my approach to this post, I promise for my part to refrain from inappropriate language, derogatory or personal attacks, to limit disagreement to ideas or facts, to speak calmly and without aggression, not to demean or harass and to be open about respectfully and courteously communicated challenges to my ideas, assertions and comments.

Fair enough?

OK, to business.

The relevant comment or issue is the first part of each numbered subparagraph below with my response set out in bold following it. If there are typos and other errors in the first part, it is because I have reproduced the content from the Forum exactly as it was posted.

1. Yes these guys are crap - from my experience they couldn't organise one beer from the brewery. Not sure if they are out and out crooks - but god alone knows where they got the EDU.com from - my guess is that they are stringing people along to squeeze as much cash as they can out of them. – In relation to the .edu, I can assist with the answer without the need for a religious experience. We registered a .edu domain because we are a Registered Training Organisation with Nationally accredited courses. We also have an AFSL, so we are heavily complianced and take it very seriously. Saying that we’re “crap” and incapable of obtaining a refreshing beverage from a brewery is unhelpful, and there is no mention of what experience this poster had with us. Were they a Member? If so, for how long? If they were unhappy, did they seek to address that with us? What was the response? Making reference in an open ended fashion to whether we are “out and out crooks” where the clear and unfounded implication is that we are is simply defamatory. Not a little bit defamatory, not sort of close to defamatory – it’s quite blatantly and seriously defamatory.

2. They charge around $12,000 for their basic course which is full of padding and very general, plus the charting software - Market Analyser - which you can get direct from MDS news. Then you pay an annual membership fee after the first year. Even though they are a registered training organisation, DO NOT TAKE ANY NOTICE OF THAT!!!! It does NOT attest to the quality of their education!! Furthermore, don't be fooled if they tell you all their trainers are successful traders. They aren't. Doing a course does not teach you how to trade! – This post is misleading and deceptive in a number of respects. It’s also an outright lie. We have a range of prices for different Memberships. Different Memberships have different Course Content, durations and other levels of inclusions. Our “basic course” is not $12,000 and never has been. We have a range of Membership options starting at around $3,500 and individual Courses from $1,500. Depending on your Membership, annual renewal is $650, for which you continue to have ongoing access to all of the Membership inclusions, can re-do all of the Training and Courses or parts thereof, continue to receive the SMC Research and SMC Stock Selection services, have access to unlimited personal mentoring and support, full trader support etc etc. And to say that “Doing a course does not teach you how to trade” is probably partially correct, if disingenuous. Successfully completing a Nationally accredited course in something is going to teach you things. It has educational outcomes that, being an RTO, we need to be assessed against and the course has to deliver on them. We work hard to continually develop and improve our course content and the manner in which we deliver it. And as for not taking any notice of our being an RTO, let me say this - many leading experts were involved not only in the construction of the course materials, but in assessing and approving the course material and assessment criteria for National accreditation. Being an RTO with Nationally accredited course material is definitely something you should pay attention to.

3. {…}, they get away with it because people who have been ripped off don't complain to ASIC. If enough people complained ASIC would take their licence away. – We don’t get away with anything, nor do we try. No-one has been ripped off and if anyone would like to produce credible evidence to the contrary we would be happy to address it. I emphasise CREDIBLE EVIDENCE. More anecdotal or third hand slander with no detail or substantiation is not credible evidence.

4. General comments about price, profiteering, gullible people being burnt, and “the legitimate industry” getting a bad name. – As stated above, we have varying Membership Packages that have widely varying access to course content, training and inclusions. We believe that those Memberships provide excellent value for money and provide much more than just the training and courses we offer. We deliver that training in groups, here in Brisbane, regionally, online, in a virtual classroom environment and one-on-one. We provide the IT Platform to implement and execute the training and continue to provide that fee-free, with all updates and tech support, indefinitely, whether you remain a Member or not. We also provide research, personal mentoring, allow Members to re-do any part of the training they want at any time, along with other benefits and inclusions. We do this because we believe that the level of support we provide to our Members is critical to their confidence and success and therefore the sustainability of our business. We have been in business for 19 years. We survived the GFC when no-one wanted to know about Sharemarket education, we survived the Brisbane Floods when we didn’t have access to our office or servers for months. We have survived, adapted and thrived because we are 100% focussed on the success of our Members. And who is this “legitimate industry” we are apparently dragging through the mud? Have they made the investment required and committed the time to obtaining an RTO and an AFSL? Are they prepared for the scrutiny and compliance that these licences and registrations involve? How long have they been in business? Once again, it’s impossible to address allegations like this, or their intended defamatory inferences and implications when no specifics are forthcoming.

5. That is correct. The thing is, there are many other 'Selling machines' like that out there, flogging off education. I feel sorry for those people that get conned into sighning up, paying thousands of dollars, believing these clowns will teach them how to make money in the markets. I've never seen any shortcuts to trading profitably. – We never advocate shortcuts and we don’t con anyone. It is insulting and defamatory to refer to us as cons and clowns. Our most prevalent Membership Packages involve 6 or 12 months of education and training. We recommend that it’s done over that period in order to ensure that our support and mentoring of Members throughout this process is not rushed and that the learnings are being properly and safely implemented. And I agree, there are many other “selling machines” out there “flogging off education”. Ones I see and hear regularly in the media include UNE, The Australian Institute of Business, Monash, Griffith, QUT etc.

6. It worries me too that these organisations are so greedy and bereft of scruples that they will sell their expensive systems to people who barely know how to turn a computer on. they also arrange loans for potential students to pay for their courses, telling them they will have no trouble recouping the money on the markets. Unfortunately ASIC doesn't go trawling for these dodgy operators. They can only act when they get complaints from the public - which is why dissatisfied clients need to complain. there are good operators in this industry, but the rubbish needs to be weeded out. – ASIC wouldn’t have to trawl far to catch us. We jumped right into their boat when we obtained our AFSL. Don’t take my word for it, but if ASIC was remotely concerned about our operations, we would have heard about it. If there had been merit-worthy complaints, we would know. This poster is somehow attempting to twist the fact that we have an AFSL and that there have been no substantiated or remotely valid complaints, or in fact ANY complaints that I am aware of, into a scenario where that’s because we’re dodgy and people we’ve duped are too lazy to speak up. It is utterly illogical, misleading and deceptive to do so. Our AFSL is OUR AFSL. It isn’t rented, we’re not a “proper authority holder” or an “authorised representative” like most financial planners running around town. How students pay for the courses or Membership is entirely up to them. We prefer that borrowings are not used and the occasions where they are is a tiny, tiny minority of Members who generally do it for tax reasons, which is not an area we get into beyond raising them, pointing out what other anonymous Members might have done in similar circumstances and suggesting they speak to their accountants about those issues. Once again, the use and publication of emotive and essentially defamatory words like “greedy and bereft of scruples”, “dodgy operators” and “rubbish” or that we need to be “weeded out” with the clear implication that all of these terms apply to the College is simply unhelpful. It is also illegal and not only a breach of this Site’s user terms but also a breach of ASIC Guidleline RG 162, specifically RG 162.42(g)(iii) – a point we have raised with Site Admin to little or no effect.

7. I think that just by exposing these people on the forum we have a very powerful voice. Look at how many views there have been of this thread alone! And yes, it is an excellent educational vehicle. – I agree that this Forum and others like it are excellent educational resources when they are used responsibly, when contributors adopt fact based approaches and refrain from emotive generalisations based on incorrect information and innuendo and when Admins properly moderate commentary that breaches site terms, ASIC Guidelines and the law.

8. This is 100% correct, a lot of people do not complain, if they are not succesfull they just think that they did something wrong - not that the 'black box' system was no good. People just wont swallow their pride and admit they did the wrong thing or make the wrong decision to join this kind of circus. Lots of people hang in for a few years and pay more fees in the hope that eventually they will make the big $$. Its all very sad really and I feel sorry for these people that loose their money. – To say that “a lot of people don’t complain” as explanation for a lack of complaints is an interesting inferential leap. Perhaps the lack of complaints reflects a lack of people who feel like they have something to complain about? In this day and age, with more and more review sites, internet forums and the ease of making anonymous complaints online with the click of a mouse, I would actually think that complaints have never been easier to make or the process more accessible. I imagine that the restaurant and accommodation industries, as one small example, would agree with that. And we don’t do “black box” systems. This is another example of the irresponsible lack of accuracy in many of the posts we are addressing in this post. Nor are we a circus.

9. Perhaps it would be more correct if I said "Doing a course does not make you a good trader".
I know there are some very good organisations with excellent trading courses, but this thread is about the Sharemarket College, and their course is not one of the good ones, in my opinion. The difficulty is in recognising which is which. I have done some fantastic trading courses for which I am very grateful. – This was partially addressed earlier, but there is nothing in this post that provides any enlightenment on the basis for the poster having any opinion of our courses, or the other extensive Membership inclusions we provide as part of our packages. Neither do we have any details of the other organisations whose courses this poster rates as excellent, or the criteria on which those courses were compared to the services we provide to our Members. Over 11,000 people have been through our courses by the way. 19 years in business. An RTO with an AFSL providing face to face training, comprehensive e-learning and virtual classroom environments, personal mentoring and support and we get our Members together every month to compare notes and engage in peer to peer learning as well. Seems like an unusual degree of openness for any organisation that has reason to worry about the quality or value of the services it offers to its clients.

10. A good course, whatever that may be, may teach you the basics of trading but it is unlikely to make you a profitable trader after completion. That takes time and experience. Finding out what works for you, and what doesn't. Learning things like how to lose and handle losses. I have yet to see a songle course that teaches you how to lose in the market. It's only by learning how to lose that you'll learn how to win. If you going to do a course, do one that's from a reputable author that has a lot of good books out there and been around a long time. Names like Jack Schwager, Dr Alexander Elder etc come to mind. – We agree that doing a few courses on their own isn’t going to make you a profitable trader. Not anymore than reading a couple of books and being able to google is going to make you a successful Doctor. That’s why we have such an emphasis on the practical side of the training and the real world scenarios we use. It’s very much reality based training as well as theoretical, academic and practical and we provide a lot of one on one mentoring and support to make sure the learning isn’t done in a vacuum. One thing we do teach about losing is how to control and limit those losses. Yes, we are very open about the fact that Members will place trades that will move against them. Risk management is a very important part of what we teach, and we provide a lot of personal support and mentoring around it. We teach very specifically about taking a professional approach, being disciplined and dealing with losses.

11. I have just got to let you all know that I have have one of these guys around our house and he gave us his sales pitch. The cost is $15000. Me and the wife silently shat ourselves so, as not to lead this guy of our horror. We told him we'd think about it and he rung back today. I have just be come a member of this forum and had a read of this thread.The best mouse click I've ever done on the internet.So I'd like to say THANK YOU! for putting this info out there as you fine people have confirmed to me that this is a huge RIP OFF!!!.- I’m not sure what “info” this poster refers to. I have attempted to go through this thread in some detail in order to answer the claims, statements and opinions being expressed and I have found very little in terms of credible information being used to back any of it up. I understand that a Membership cost in the order of $15,000 can provide a degree of sticker shock, but if that is the Membership Package that was suggested as the one that best met this person’s needs I can say with confidence that it would have been a suggestion made after a detailed analysis of their needs and stated goals and requirements. It would have been for a Platinum Membership that includes every single Course we offer, delivered flexibly over a 12 month period (and possibly a 24 month period) including as face to face training, in our virtual classroom environment, in groups, locally or in the area in which the Member resides and also as one on one teaching, as well as the fully featured and uniquely functional technology platform that supports and executes the training, unlimited personal, one on one training, support and mentoring, unlimited personal support, access to our research service, stock recommendation service, the pre-alert technology we have built into the platform over 15 years (and which differs from the usual technical indicators in a number of respects) and the ability to renew annually for $650 and continue to receive all of that for as long as they were a Member. When we analyse our cost of delivery of this type of product and service offering over the time frame involved and you take into account the amount of personal, tailored, one on one attention Members get (ie unlimited) – the question is about the value this represents, not the price. We also have Membership packages starting at $3,500 and courses from $1,500. It all depends on what people need and want.

12. References to John Jarratt – This criticism was a bit spurious, but I’ll deal with it anyway. John is an Australian institution in terms of acting. Whilst his character in Wolf Creek accounts for recent fame, he’s been on A Country Practice, McCleod’s Daughters, Water Rats, Blue Heelers, Better Homes and Gardens, and appeared in great Australian films from Picnic at Hanging Rock to Australia. He hosted Play School too, in case we forget. I think intelligent people can separate an actor’s roles from their personal lives and John is known to be a great supporter and advocate for the Australian Film Industry. We have no regrets whatsoever in allowing him to endorse the College publicly.

13. Sonray - The Sonray issue was certainly unfortunate, but Sonray was only a supplier of a technical adjunct platform that enabled people to go to market with certain of their trades. The Directors turned out to be bent, and they have been pursued and punished, with our assistance. There is not and never has been a credible suggestion that SMC or any of the other businesses who used the Sonray platform (and there were many) were in any way associated with that conduct. There is not and never was any type of association or connection between Sonray and SMC other than as supplier and client. Individuals within SMC suffered the same fallout as everyone else using the Sonray platform. We went to great lengths with our Members to mitigate that fallout. Commentary on this is of the nature of “never let the facts get in the way of a good story” and the media was about as accurate in their reporting as were various commentators online – ie sensationalist, inaccurate and lazy. Sadly, that’s nothing new.

14. I have to agree with {…} - these guys are a total rip off. You can find the information they teach, free on the internet and as far as support - there is none! Don't believe the sales pitch I would be $15,000 better off if I had of read this forum first. – The claim that there is no support is just completely wrong. How does this person make this statement? On what basis? It isn’t stated. It’s a barefaced assertion that is false and misleading in the extreme. If this poster was in fact a Platinum Member there is just no way known that they could have received no support unless they changed their email, disconnected their phones, moved house and hid under a rock for 12 months. I won’t re-hash the comments I have already made other than to say once again that bare assertions that SMC is a rip-off with absolutely no information or evidence to support that claim are not something I can respond to sensibly and raise the legitimate question of what the intention was when making the post. It certainly doesn’t seem to be for the purpose of expressing a legitimate, properly founded opinion or providing substantiated and unbiased information. How would you even know if they were ever even a Member? They don’t even get the price of the Membership right, it’s just a reproduction from an earlier post that was also wrong. You’d think if they had ever really been a paid up Member they would know what they paid.

15. Conversations with SMC representatives at Trade Shows – Like many businesses, we attend Trade Shows to gain exposure to potential clients. Giving any sort of detailed analysis of specific trading scenarios in a trade booth at a trade show just isn’t possible, nor is it responsible. It is a means of introduction used to establish if there is an interest in what we do. It’s not a one-on-one mentoring session to discuss market strategies. Not everyone manning a trade booth at all hours over a number of days is part of the trader/advisor team or an SMC trainer either. That’s not the purpose of the booth. If you want to have that sort of conversation, please, I invite you to arrange a meeting or phone call with one of our qualified trader/advisers. If you are a member of this forum who has weighed in on this thread previous to this post, mention this forum post and I will ensure that you get an hour of their time, free of charge.

16. I recently spoke to a sales rep from the sharemarket college by the name of Sujen Bhashkar about the training course and self managed super funds as they teach you how to do this. He later emailed me and said that last year "our self managed super fund members returned over 34%... we give you an edge that you never had in the sharemarket because I guarantee that this is what you will have with our training and education." These are direct quotes from his email. I have complained to ASIC and to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The Financial Ombudsman have confirmed that they have received a number of complaints from current investors. They also said that it is illegal to guarantee profits. – Firstly, and as stated previously, we don’t guarantee profits. Ever. Even the above attempt at selectively quoting the email, always a dead giveaway of questionable intent, can’t be read that way. So this person complained to ASIC and the FO, absolutely their right and entitlement. Given the spurious and unsubstantiated nature of the complaint it is small wonder that we still have our AFSL and continue to trade. For 19 years now. Whilst I absolutely support any means or processes by which people can seek redress for wrongdoings, I also hold the view that natural justice and procedural fairness are important and that the complainer should have an obligation to properly construct their claim and support it with appropriate evidence. And I doubt very much that ASIC or the FO would ever have discussed any aspects of, or even the existence of, any other complaints that this poster alleges were referred to. It’s not how they operate, and for very good reason.

17. Posts by Ladybird – Yes, she is an employee of the College, now. No, she wasn’t put up to making posts on this Forum. She did it because she was also a Member and was unhappy about what she saw as falsehoods being propagated and going unanswered. It was done entirely off her own bat and as I understand it, without the knowledge of the College owners. Was it well advised? Probably not, but it was well intentioned and an honest expression of her opinion based on direct knowledge and experience as a Member before becoming an employee. She has been called a liar and various other things by Site Admin for posting her honest opinion about her experience as an SMC Member purely on the basis that she did not disclose that she had become an SMC employee, personal information that frankly is no-one’s business when her post was in her private capacity as a Member and was not done at the behest of or even the knowledge of SMC. In breach of the Site’s own rules, Site Admin published her name on the Forum and had to be repeatedly requested to delete that.

18. People who claim to have received little or “nothing” or who say someone told them that they got little or nothing – This is difficult to address without specifics, but as a general response to a general and unsupported claim, we have excellent systems that deal with product and service delivery and in no case, to the best of my knowledge having made due enquiry, has anyone ever received “nothing” or less than we represent as the entitlements of whatever level of membership they purchased. In fact, we routinely over-deliver on promises – in my opinion. It happens that every Member I have ever dealt with feels the same way.

19. Their course is simply extraordinary basic with little or no support , they don't provide backtesting or algorithms based systems. – This is completely and demonstrably false. I have already dealt with the support we offer and to generalise about “the course” when we offer half a dozen Nationally accredited courses of varying complexity is just another unfounded, unsubstantiated generalisation leavened with error and misdirection. We also have an extensive selection of other training across a wide variety of subject matter, from an introductory level to advanced techniques. Further - our system DOES provide full back testing capability, against 15 years of data. I’m not sure exactly what “algorithms based systems” is supposed to refer to, but our IT Platform and system incorporates not only the usual technical indicators but also our proprietary “Pre-Alert” technology, which are in fact algorithms. And it is proprietary - meaning we developed them, tested them extensively and implemented them at a great investment of time and resources using experts in the field.

20. Their systems consists of trendlines, support and resistance higher high and higher lows. They're so called advisers don't even own trading account themselves. – Yes, those are a small part of what our IT Platform can do. A very small part. And our Trader/Advisers all trade, and have trading accounts. How this poster even purports to know the personal financial dealings of our employees is a bit of a mystery. In any event, they are wrong so it doesn’t matter really. What matters is the dishonesty of this post.

21. Reference to claimed returns – We do make reference to our Members with SMSF’s making returns in the 30% plus per annum range. Not all do, some do better, it’s an average and one we’re able to justify and evidence. We don’t promise that anyone will make those returns themselves. We don’t project profits. That depends on far too many variables – how well a Member completes the training, how they implement it, how active they are, if they follow their trading plan, if they adapt their trading plan to suit market conditions, whether they utilize the mentoring, research and advisory aspects of our services, how diligent and disciplined they are etc.

22. Critical posts by people who have a post count of as few as 1 – There are a couple of these. I don’t think they require a response although a couple of my earlier responses do deal with 1 post critics who seem to have popped up on the forum for the express purpose of misleading and deceiving readers. I’m sure you can draw your own conclusions from that.

23. Membership and/or Course fees being paid from Super – I understand that there seems to be some confusion around this. Sometimes asking a question to the wrong person and providing only part of the information they require to answer it can yield inaccurate answers. Not all accountants are familiar with the complexities of Superannuation compliance and governance. In fact, most have a fairly rudimentary grasp. It’s a specialised area and most accountants are generalists. Training courses that complement the investments of the fund are a common and allowable deduction. Our understanding of the situation, after having taken specific and expert advice, is that in most cases, the cost of the education, training and membership for The Sharemarket College is a deductible expense provided that the training is being undertaken for the operation of the SMSF and is a reasonable expense having reference to the Superannuation Benefit in each case. If you wanted to travel to the Sunshine Coast to do the training there, you might want to think twice before claiming the travel costs and accommodation. There are a number of things that are deductible for SMSF’s and I have listed some of them below (the material for these things have been copied from a publically available website), although it’s important that people take specific and qualified expert tax advice on their individual circumstances, as we always advocate. The below is very general information and does not constitute advice. Have a look at Taxation Ruling TR 93/17 and speak to an accountant who specialises in Self-Managed Superannuation. CFDHunter – I’m sorry, but it looks like you received bad advice and the link you were sent isn’t particularly relevant to the process of claiming a deduction for education and training expenses paid from your Super Fund. It’s unfortunate that this news has upset you, but understandable that it did. I can refer you to several accountants and specialist Super advisers who can properly advise you if you like.

Subscriptions
You can have your SMSF pay for this expense and the expense will be tax deductible to the SMSF. The receipt for the expense must be in the name of the SMSF. A copy of the receipt evidencing that the expense is in the name of your SMSF will be requested at financial year end as part of the annual compliance process.

Newsletters
You can have your SMSF pay for this expense and the expense will be tax deductible to the SMSF. The receipt for the expense must be in the name of the SMSF. A copy of the receipt evidencing that the expense is in the name of your SMSF will be requested at financial year end as part of the annual compliance process.

Seminars
You can have your SMSF pay for this expense and the expense will be tax deductible to the SMSF. The receipt for the expense must be in the name of the SMSF. A copy of the receipt evidencing that the expense is in the name of your SMSF will be requested at financial year end as part of the annual compliance process.

Share Trading Courses
You can have your SMSF pay for this expense and the expense will be tax deductible to the SMSF. The receipt for the expense must be in the name of the SMSF. Note however that the expense must be reasonable in terms of the cost and the Super Benefit to which it applies. A copy of the receipt evidencing that the expense is in the name of your SMSF will be requested at financial year end as part of the annual compliance process.

Share Trading Software
You can have your SMSF pay for this expense and the expense will be tax deductible to the SMSF. Note however that the expense must be reasonable in terms of the cost and the Super Benefit to which it applies. A copy of the receipt evidencing that the expense is in the name of your SMSF will be requested at financial year end as part of the annual compliance process.

24. After losing into the tens of thousands of bucks 'learning' from the SMC, it is about time I came clean and aired dirty laundry! – RT14 had a few things to say and apparently was or is a Member. Firstly, we don’t charge “tens of thousands of bucks” for any of our Memberships that apply to individuals so how someone can “lose” this amount on our education is a mystery. And you don’t “lose” money on education, you pay for it. Just like I am right now with my MBA. Just like I did with my Undergraduate Degree. I could of course choose not to apply myself to my education or fail to implement what I learned in a useful manner but that would be on me wouldn’t it? And if I chose not to raise any issue I say I have directly with my education provider but instead head online and cast anonymous and inaccurate aspersions I might expect that people would be entitled to assume that my supposed grievance was manufactured or flimsy at best and that, due to the either fictitious or self-inflicted nature of my “complaint”, I was too embarrassed to raise it in the manner any normal person would (ie directly with the supplier) if I felt I had lost “tens of thousands of bucks”. If, RT14, you have a legitimate complaint, please by all means contact us directly with full details. Our courses are Nationally Accredited and the content, learning outcomes and delivery are heavily monitored by ASQA. RTOs are recognised as providers of quality-assured and nationally recognised training and qualifications. The vocational education and training (VET) Quality Framework is aimed at achieving greater national consistency in the way providers are registered and monitored and in how standards in the vocational education and training (VET) sector are enforced.

The VET Quality Framework comprises:
- the Standards for National VET Regulator (NVR) Registered Training Organisations
- the Fit and Proper Person Requirements
- the Financial Viability Risk Assessment Requirements
- the Data Provision Requirements, and
- the Australian Qualifications Framework.

The link to the website referencing our services in China that was also included in this post along with some derogatory commentary is hardly recent. That arrangement dates back 6 or 7 years. We have Members in different countries and have carried out training in Asia. I don’t know why it’s such a revelation that people outside Australia might be interested in learning how to trade the financial markets here or why an Australian business endeavouring to export its services should be the subject of a snide attack.

25. Reference to a Magic Wand – It really is very easy to take cheap pot shots about a single term when you take something completely out of context and misrepresent the nature of the discussion to fit your own agenda. We have never said that what we train you to do is a magic wand that will miraculously produce massive returns. There are some very useful things our software and trade execution platform does that enable a lot of data to be analysed very quickly, like the unique Pre-Alert Indicators we have that scan the whole market, market sectors or indices identifying various conditions that are very relevant for watch-listing stocks, identifying patterns and looking for certain criteria as they apply to individual stocks, sectors or indices – all of which assists in selecting and analysing trade opportunities. The speed and consistency of the application of these tools and alerts could be said to be like using a magic wand in that an enormous amount of data is analysed on very specific criteria, very quickly and facilitates better decisions while reducing many hours of laborious work to a few minutes. All of our conversations in and out of this office are recorded for compliance purposes. We have our own AFSL and we take compliance very seriously. If there’s a particular conversation that someone objects to, I’m happy to review it in detail. It would certainly be more useful than snide, out of context references designed to make our staff sound unprofessional.

That is it for the direct response part of this post.

I can't apologise for the length of this post. It is as long as it needed to be. If this thread remains open for further comment, (and as I have suggested to the Site Admin, in our view it should be closed if they are not mindful to heed our requests for it to be deleted entirely), I am happy to answer any questions that people may have and to provide reasonable clarification of any points I have made or raised.

Hopefully we can keep the tone of any ensuing discussion, if any, at a level of respect and professionalism that will enable a courteous exchange of views and some fact based and agenda free exchanges of ideas. I may not reply instantly to subsequent posts if this thread remains open, but I will endeavour to do so in a reasonable amount of time should it be necessary.

Thankyou for taking the time to read and consider what I’ve written.

 

[prawntrader]

SOME INTERESTING FACTS:

The above post was typed by Karl Scott who is the share market college’s salesman. He is also an out of work solicitor who was so poor that he was living on the office floor at the SMC offices in Kangaroo Point at the time the above was posted. If an out of work solicitor who is essentially homeless is trying to sell you a $15000 package on how to make millions trading CFD’s then you should run a mile!

The Share market college was investigated by the immigration department earlier in the year for hiring a broker (from the UK) who was working in this country illegally. That broker has since been removed.

The head trainer (and we use this term lightly here) Jason Sidney has literally no financial qualifications what so ever. This means that every single time he gives a student or client advice he is breaking the law. If Jason gives you advice on a trade and the trade goes wrong then SMC is liable.

We’ll just reiterate this shall we. If Jason Sidney gives you any financial advice on anything pertaining to trading what so ever he is breaking the law. If you have placed any trades based on any advice that anyone at SMC has given you, and you have lost money, then you need to speak with SMC for a full refund. If they refuse, you need to speak with the Financial Services Ombudsman to make an official complaint to obtain refunds on all trades.

Make a full enquiry into the commission SMC is charging you on all trades. Then ring a few other brokers and ask them. It won’t take long and you’ll be surprised by just how much you’re being over charged.

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) raided and interviewed the SMC at their Kangaroo Point offices earlier in the year.

The share market college has been investigated by the financial services ombudsman on no less than three occasions, based on complaints by clients. One of these investigations centred on SMC placing unauthorised trades and losing clients money.

If you are an SMC client they have a duty to inform you that both ASIC and the Financial Services Ombudsman have interviewed them. If they have not, we urge you to contact the two agencies and make inquiries.

The share market college was a conduit to Sonray Capital whose directors are now in prison for stealing millions from their investors. If you obtain a copy of the creditors list you will see that SMC (who used Sonray as their broker and who had all their money with Sonray) SMC is not on that list. This is because just before the multi million dollar Sonray collapse, SMC was given advance warning and withdrew their money. SMC did not pass this heads up to their clients and SMC clients lost millions. Share market staff have been heard openly bragging about getting their money out in time. SMC will refute this fact but if you obtain a copy of the creditors list, SMC is not on it.

The Director of the share market college, Graeme Rogers claims to be an electrical engineer, yet has been unable to prove this fact. He also has literally no financial qualifications.

The share market college claims to have over 10000 members. They have less than 100.

We have emails from other SMC salesmen to clients claiming that you will make a guaranteed 30-60% profit when you trade with SMC. This is highly illegal.

Graeme Rogers often tells perspective clients that they (SMC) have a special arrangement with the ANZ bank so you take out a $15000 loan to pay for the course. They do not have any type of agreement what so ever. They just want to get your $15000. Before you do take out a loan, think about this: if you need to borrow money just to take a course on how to trade shares, what money are you going to use to trade shares? If you cannot afford to do a course without taking out a loan, then you probably can't afford to trade in the stock market.

The three brokers that SMC has used to execute trades on the ASX (Sonray Capital, BBY and D2MX) have all failed and gone into liquidation(except D2MX) under interesting circumstances. Clients from both brokers have lost millions, yet the share market college has not lost money either time. D2MX has just received a $110000 fine by ASIC). This means that every single broker that the Share Market college goes into business with either fails with investors losing their money or is fined by ASIC for breaking the law. How safe do you feel having your money with SMC now?

Only days before Sonray Capital Director Russel Johnson was sentenced to prison for stealing millions from investors, he had a meeting with Jill Rogers and her son Josh Rogers in the offices of SMC.

At no time did either Graeme or Jill Rogers disclose to any of SMC investors in the that they were in business with Russel Johnson and his wife, while Russel was in prison for stealing from investors.

It has been speculated that the Rogers are using the money from Share Market clients to live of. At this stage the Rogers have failed to prove how the money is being spent and where it is. The directors of SMC have been unable to prove how they are keeping the business afloat.

Are the directors of the share market college running a Ponzi scheme with their client’s funds? If not, we call on the directors to contact each of their clients and prove to them where their money is. All it will take is a quick phone call and a bank statement.

Josh Rogers is the IT Manager, the CEO in training (and has a few other titles too) yet he has literally no tertiary qualifications apart from being an out of work kitchen hand and the child of the Rogers. How can someone with such little experience be trusted to approve the traders trading recommendations, manage the computer systems of a stock broker and manage the client’s funds?

Keep an eye out for the company and website FIWS. It’s SMC using a different name.

Due to the negative press on virtually every single share trading forum, the Rogers started their own website. The entire website was so that people could post positive only reviews about SMC. SMC staff called their clients and could only source three people to post positive reviews. The website has since been taken down.

Graeme Rogers even emailed this forum and threatened them, trying to force them to shut down the negative reviews of SMC. They have no legal team and no money so naturally nothing happened.

Go on Youtube and check out https://www.youtube.com/user/sharemarketcollege and the first video is actor John Jarret hawking SMC. Let’s be really clear about this. John Jarret has never (as in never ever) been a paid member or client of the Share Market college. Staff joke about this fact all of the time. He has not taken a single class to learn how to trade shares. He was paid.

While you’re on YouTube check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0E33xq_BTE and wait until the blonde lade (her name is Laura) comes on and talks about her positive experiences with SMC. At the time of the video, Laura was a sales person for SMC and was selling the $15000 training package she is talking about, earning commission from each sale. Yeah, not surprising you think it’s just wonderful, Laura!

The Rogers have recently had to sell most of their assets including their boat and house and are now back to renting. If their training package is so brilliant and their clients are all making millions trading CFD’s and Forex, then why are the directors of this stock broker having to sell everything just to keep the doors open?

Josh Rogers is the CEO in training and air to the Rogers business yet he has never owned his own home and from what we can find has no equity in the business or even own shares.

The offices of SMC have literally no electronic security or surveillance at the Kangaroo Point offices other than a lock on the front door.

If you have money in SMC’s escrow account, call them up and ask for them to transfer it out. Seriously, ring them up and ask them to do it. Legally all you have to do it give notice and they must do this. Good luck!

The only person at SMC to hold an RG146 licence is Jill Rogers. If anyone else offers you any advice on any financial services matter they are breaking the law and must be reported.

If anyone from the share market college (even Jill) asks specifics with regards to your financial situation, how much you earn, how much you want to trade, how much is in your super (anything) then they are breaking the law. SMC only have a XYZ licence yet have been breaching that for years. We urge you report them.

Have you notice that the results you were getting when you were “paper trading” during training are vastly different to the results you are getting now that you are trading with real money? Think about this for a second. We would ask that you obtain a cop of all of your trades and go through them to find any, shall we say, discrepancies.

If you’re an SMC client and they sold you on trading CFD’s or Contracts for Difference did they give you this http://download.asic.gov.au/media/2125916/ris-rg227-1.pdf ? No? Well, they should have. Naughty, naughty!

This is what ASIC says about the risks of trading CFD’s:

“Risk areas in trading CFDs include margin calls, investment loss, gapping, opaque pricing structures and counterparty risk. Many of these risks are difficult to explain to investors. Table 1 sets out the key risk areas according to the issuer’s business model. The combination of risks is not present in simpler financial products commonly traded by retail investors, where disclosure is more straightforward. When investors take out a CFD position, they are only required to commit a small percentage of the underlying value of the assets in question; however, they are required to maintain a certain percentage of the value of the position in their account (margin). A margin call can occur if the market moves against an investor so that the margin falls below the required amount. If this occurs, the investor will need to post additional cash or sell a portion of their position to restore the margin””that is, the investor must pay the issuer the difference between the current price of the underlying asset and the price when the investor took out the contract. With a high degree of leverage, this could be many times more than the original amount invested. Margin calls are often a feature of leveraged products, and investment risk is inherent to investing in financial products, in general. However, the potential for margin calls and large losses are much greater in CFDs than for many other leveraged products. CFD issuers generally offer investors a much higher degree of leverage than do issuers of other products like margin loans.”

This is what SMC Director Graeme Rogers says about the risks of trading CFD’s:

“CFD trading is 'as easy as buying a simple stock in Australia.”

And if you don’t believe us, check out this little gem from a few years ago in the Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/business/cfds...t-led-investors-to-sonray-20100715-10cnn.html .

Now, this is a pretty big one. It is illegal for you to pay for any training package with money from your superannuation fund. You can be prosecuted by the ATO and be served with a huge fine and even prison time. (you can look this up on either the ATO or ASIC website). If SMC told you that you can pay for the $15000 training course out of your super they are breaking the law. If they helped you set up your self managed super fund (SMSF) and showed you haw to pay for the course from your super fund then they are breaking the law. And so did you. But, if you speak with the ATO and ASIC and explain that you paid for the course under advisement from your broker (the share market college) then the onus will be placed back into SMC for giving you incorrect financial advice, which they are not licensed to do anyway. That’s not your fault.

Did you know that the data that SMC charge you for every month (charts, live prices etc etc) is the most expensive on the market? No other broker charges you for 20 minute delayed data. I mean, except for SMC that is. That’s because the ASX doesn’t charge. Where is all that money going?

The “solicitor” who handles all of the compliance for all of the (alleged) 10000 trading members of the share market college is a one man band working out of Sydney. We’re curious how one man can do the compliance for all of the trades for thousands of clients all on his lonesome and 1000KM away!

Have you noticed that you can trade CFD’s and Forex 24/7 with SMC, yet you can’t get anyone to answer the phone after 5PM? What happens if you use money from your SMSF and the trade doesn’t execute or something goes wrong after 5PM? Of course, if you do get someone to answer the phone there’s a good chance it’s an out of work solicitor trying to sleep on the floor under his desk. We think that every client should ring SMC tonight and see what happens.

In the past two years, SMC has gone through (aprx.) eight stock brokers and ten sales staff. Interesting. Wonder what’s going on over there!

How are SMC keeping the doors open? Is it with trading profits? Is it by using client funds? When the Directors are selling assets to stay afloat you do have to wonder, don’t you?

If you check out http://www.smc.edu.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=48 it gives you a list of all of the locations where the mighty Share Market college is located. They’re everywhere! Actually, no, they are not. They have only one location and it’s in Kangaroo Point. The other locations are false and are there to give the prospective mark, I mean investor, a sense that SMC is a huge company with thousands of staff.

Did you know that SMC is advertising to the Chinese Market? We do! Check out http://www.chuguo.cn/school/aus/sharemarket/training.html.


So, to sum it all up this is what we've found:

1. The Sharemarket College (SMC) are under investigation by the financial ombudsman, ASIC and the Department of Immigration.
2. No one at SMC (Except for Jill) has any financial qualifications what so ever.
3. They are breaking the law every single time they give you trading or financial advice on anything specific.
4. They have close ties to Russel Johnson and his wife and were conducting business with him even after he was convicted of stealing more than $40M from investors.
5. SMC are not on the creditors list for Sonray Capital and somehow knew to withdraw all of their money only days before the collapse, yet SMC clients lost millions.
6. The three stock brokers who execute SMC trades have all collapsed.
7. The IT Manager and CEO in training is a kitchen hand.
8. The head salesman is an out of work solicitor who was living in the office as he was homeless.
9. The client testimonials on youtube are sales staff.
10. SMC pretend to have locations all over Australia, but they really only have one. It's in Kangaroo Point. And there is no electronic security/
11. SMC sales people (including the Directors) guarantee profits ranging from 20% to 60%. This is highly illegal.
12. The Rogers are selling off assets including their home and boat (the list goes on) just to keep the doors open. Which is weird because they guarantee profits of 20% to 60%.
13. SMC staff often pose as happy clients and go on forums. Ladybyrd is a culprit and has posted on this forum. She has never been a paid member and receives the courses for free. She has also lost money on trades with SMC.
14. ASIC tells us that trading CFD's are risky. Graeme Rogers tells us it's easy...
15. SMC advise their new clients to open a SMSF (self managed super fund) and to pay for the $15000 course on how to trade shares with money from clients super funds... this is highly illegal and you can be prosecuted and receive a huge fine and/ or prison time.
16. If you have been advised to pay for the share trading course from your SMSF or have paid for it from your SMSF then we advise you to contact the ATO and ASIC and speak with them and explain that you were advised to do this by Graeme and Jill Rogers. Let them go to jail, not you. It's highly illegal and SMC know it!
17. The "solicitor" who handles all of the compliance for the 10000 alleged members is a one man band working out of Sydney.

 

[JillRogers]

OK – you’ve got me!
Yes – I am Jill Rogers, Co-owner of SMC , Responsible Manager of our AFSL, and Principal of our RTO - and I am not hiding behind an alias, like the former poster ‘Prawn Trader’.
Both Graeme and I, as SMC owners, have had much advice not to post replies on this forum from colleagues and legal representative, as it ‘would perpetuate the negativism of anonymous and questionable content’. And we were prepared to take that advice – but no longer. When malicious, slanderous and untrue statements are made about my Company, my staff, and my family…..enough is enough, and I am retaliating.
How interesting that Prawn Trader knows so many ‘facts’ about SMC and the financial industry – makes me wonder if he is an ex-employee who is being investigated for activities which represent ‘questionable’ ethics. However, I am not going to be dragged down to a level of innuendo BUT I am going to honestly answer the poisonous, untrue and slanderous statements made in this previous post.
B]Mis-statements
1. Yes, Karl Scott slept at the office on two occasions – “Prawn Trader’ obviously didn’t sleep with him, or he would have learnt that it was the result of an altercation with his girlfriend and subsequent copious intake of alcohol! – it made for some jocularity around the office and even made our blog! Oh, and if there was someone saying you would make millions out of trading CFDs, then you should run a mile! Our main course units concentrate on equity trading and investment strategies, as well as Exchange Traded Options. We educate our members in the risks of CFDs and very rarely promote them except for risk management purposes.
2. The Immigration Department is not investigating SMC – Yes – we did have a UK institutional trader apply for a position and Yes, we did sponsor his working visa – more fool us because he then gained a highly paid position with a Sydney Fund Manager once he had received it! Beware any businesses out there who choose to do the same! ( not that I think any true business owners would read this forum)
3. Jason Sidney – Jason, I believe , is one of the most professional and talented technical analysts we have in the country. Originally the head trainer for Safety In The Market, he holds RG146 qualification and Cert IV in Training and Assessment - as a representative of SMC’s AFSL, he is qualified to give general financial securities advice for all of the products covered by our licence. Jason has had many health struggles in recent years but continues to be a hard-working, loyal member of our staff and his knowledge is unquestionable.
4. ASIC has never raided or visited the offices of SMC, at Kangaroo Point, although we did receive a rather dubious phone call from a ‘reporter’ who said they were at the office - proved to be a hoax when investigated by the police.
5. Yes – SMC is communicating with the Ombudsman on two cases – they are not about losing money, or trades –and I would think that to only have two cases in dispute over a period of 17 plus years would put us in a minority of financial services providers.
6. Sonray Capital Markets was certainly a thorn in the side of our business history – and No, you won’t see SMC as an investor creditor, but you will certainly see the Rogers Super Fund as one. Yes – we trusted in the Company so much, we placed our fund on their platform and in doing so, lost as much, if not more, than many others. And, PrawnTrader (what an apt name!) also forgot to mention to you in his myriad of knowledge, that SMC was an unsecured Trade Creditor and lost a revenue source which we worked hard for, with less than an hours’ notice – so l challenge PrawnTrader to come out of hiding and prove his statement of being given advance warning , because if we had received such warning, all of our clients would have been withdrawn. As an addendum to this, we DID get all of our clients away from BBY when we heard rumours that they were in trouble – let’s think logically- why wouldn’t we? – our members are our business.
7. Graeme has no obligation to prove to anyone that he is an electrical engineer – that belonged back in his days at Dampier with Hamersley Iron (now RIO) – how PrawnTrader purports to be knowledgeable about back in the mid-seventies is a mystery, but then, so are most of his mis-statements. We don’t have to prove this fact – our friends know it and that’s enough, and totally irrelevant. Oh!, and by the Way, Graeme has held a Diploma in Financial Services ( Fin. Planning) for six years and is a Responsible Manager for the AFSL, or maybe you don’t think that should count.
8. I am very happy to supply our Contact with the ANZ bank who will confirm our arrangement with them , even though we do not promote this facility any more – and it was in response to some request from business people who know that it was a smart strategy to use debt to create equity . Most educated people know of this wealth concept.
9. The statement about Graeme and I using client’s funds is totally slanderous and untrue – and shows Prawn Trader’s dubious nature and lack of knowledge, aside from his malicious intent - we do not hold client funds. Every client has their funds in their own bank account, as are their investments in their own name and possession. They can view their bank account in both the trading software or online to the bank site at any time. Our mission is to teach them how to invest their own funds wisely into quality instruments and manage risk. I ask anyone that may doubt this to come and meet with us – not to do anything but see our Accredited course content and our operations, and talk to real members who are happy to relate their experiences, not those who have to hide behind false aliases and make up malicious untruths as many have in this forum.
10. Owning a business in the environment of the last decade has been hard, as any business owner will confirm – the GFC, the Queensland floods ( where we were out of our premises for over eight weeks) and the subsequent lack of confidence in the community all lead to this – we, as owners, have not been immune to this. We deliberately took measures to sustain the business through these times – measures that involved our personal assets and none of others – and we are proud that we have been able to do that and keep our staff employed. We do not have to prove anything to anyone other than an annual audit by an ASIC approved auditor as per the conditions of an AFSL holder.
11. 11. The personal attack on my family and staff will be vigorously acted upon. Yes – our son is the COO of SMC. No– he was not a kitchen-hand but a qualified chef at Burswood resort in the mid-eighties. Thankfully after a few years, he saw the light and began his IT career, thus joining us in the business. Yes , he has IT Certificate IV qualifications, and Yes , he has RG146 ASIC qualification, and Yes – he has been privately trading for some years. Having four children he is still saving to buy a house, because, contrary to your comments, Prawn trader, we don’t use client monies to live off! No, he does not approve recommendations, that is my job! And now, Prawn Trader, you have stupidly identified yourself ! Shame on you when your activities were so easily exposed.
12. The SMC Review site contains only unsolicited testimonials, but of course, few on this forum would believe that – it is not taken down and still exists. And Laura was a SMC member for ten years before she asked if she could work with SMC and share her experiences with others, but of course, you wouldn’t believe that either. If anyone wants to check this out, please give me a call and I will be happy to have them contact you.
13. Gosh, it’s interesting to be told we have sold all our assets – mind you, I know a lot of business owners who have had to do exactly that, BUT Lo! – what is that sitting in the water at the back of our property on a pontoon!!! Oh, yes , it’s a boat – and if anyone doubts that, please give us a call and we’ll take you for a real boat ride – promise it won’t sink. And before you start thinking how it was paid for, Yes – all from our money and hard work!... but then you probably won’t believe that either!
14. As for our office at Kangaroo Point – it is not luxurious, but it is neat and functional – open plan and informal, which is just what our members enjoy as they feel free to pop in at any time to spend time with the trainers or advisers. Oh! – and we do have a fully back-to-base alarm system – how on earth did Prawn Trader miss that?
15. Prawn Trader seems to be obsessed with CFDs and Fx – Yes – our accredited unit contains all of the warnings and guidelines of trading them, as well as links to other sites – as mentioned before, we don’t promote them heavily – we’ve been caught by the unscrupulous companies like BBY and Sonray as well – you see, CFD’s are not the real problem, it’s the companies who provide them and the conditions under which they are traded – the provider risk a.k.a. Sonray, BBY, Opus Prime. Thankfully, if our members do want to trade them, we are able to see when they don’t apply the right risk management and ring them to urge them to do so. That’s part of the protection and mentoring program we are proud of. And if you believe that a newspaper journalist doesn’t misrepresent a person’s statement to make an article more sensational, then I cannot help that.
16. Data charges – SMC does not receive these charges, D2MX, the software provider does, and they are not for data alone – they are for technical support team at D2MX, and the IRESS platform.
17. There are many other misleading statements in the prior post that do not even deserve a response and they will be acted upon by our Solicitor – you know, that one in Sydney who’s a ‘one man band’ – Oh! – but wait, who are these other people working with him that have ‘Associate’ beside their name!! I can assure you he is a very prominent and highly thought of name in the Financial services industry – if you doubt this, please call me and I will show you where you can link up with his profile.
18. SMC holds and delivers an accredited Course which contains a unit that has been designed for Self Managed Super Funds, - as such it is an allowable deduction for Funds Trustees. The product of specific SMSF education has been discussed at many SMSF conferences and has been accepted by the industry professionals, Accountants, Auditors etc. In the past many years, we have not had a member who has had this expense dis-allowed as an investment to assist the Trustee to manage the fund’s assets effectively. We now have many accountants who recommend our product to Trustees so they can gain the knowledge required. Our Trustee’s Workshop is compliant with the ATO’s guidelines and is delivered in the SMSF unit. Our Australian Financial Services licence covers Superannuation products.
19. And, finally, to me, Jill Rogers. I commenced this business back in 1996, with a passion to show people what they could do if they decided to take control, rather than hand it away. At the same time, I ‘walked the talk’, gained my knowledge inside a broking house, embarked on a journey, not just of education and gaining qualifications ( Diploma of Financial Markets, Diploma of Financial Planning, Cert IV in Training and Assessment, and others), but I immersed my time with true leaders in the industry, real experts who taught institutional traders, and broking CEO’s – people who not only had the skills and knowledges, but knew how to impart it. More importantly, I was a trader of equities, derivatives and invested our own SMSF – being in the market for that many years teaches you far more than any qualification can. I took the step of applying to become a Registered Training College – not that it has benefited us much, but it gives our members the confidence to know that we have quality assurance programs and continual improvement of course content etc – the Department of Education / ASQA, as the controlling body, demand high standards of processes and standards to remain a private RTO and we have been accredited for the longest allowable time frame three times now. This, in an environment, when many RTO’s have collapsed. When we decided that we should have the facility to mentor our traders ‘on market’ we took the measure of acquiring our own AFSL, once again coming under a lot of compliance regulation but showing our members we were committed to be at the forefront of compliance requirements. In spite of all of the above, I remain as passionate about what we deliver as I have ever been, as Graeme, Josh and all of our staff do. Yes – we might make some mistakes sometimes, but they are never deliberate, and we continue to learn. But I know one thing, we are not dishonest, we do not mislead, we do everything to assist our members to get the knowledge to make a difference in their lives, and we are passionate about client service. Our trainers, Solution Partners and Presenters who deal with our clients are fully qualified, and maintain their skills with our internal training program, and this must be displayed at each annual audit, along with their training records.
So there you have it, warts and all. I abhor the people who hide behind forums such as this, and who have made their personal vendetta against the college evident in this thread, above all the prior PrawnTrader’s malicious and misleading post with personal attacks on me and my family, apart from those about SMC. I invite and encourage anyone to call either Graeme or myself up and come into the College to discuss any issue you may have. We will happily show you all of our operations, course content and processes, and you can meet our staff. I also challenge ASF to place this post where many past enquirers can see it, and hopefully see another side of this thread, instead of the dubious and untrue comments made. I note in ASF’s Code of Conduct, the following statement ‘Any information that you post must be true or accurate to the best of your knowledge’. I also note in my ‘Welcome’ email from ASF describing ASF as’ a positive and constructive online community and we expect everyone to treat other members with both courtesy and respect. If only that were true!
I make no apologies for my remarks, and assure you that I have given you the absolute true state of things and as such, have not chosen to hide behind anything, or indeed, to make snide and vicious comments about things about which I have no knowledge.

 

[get better]

Both Graeme and I, as SMC owners, have had much advice not to post replies on this forum from colleagues and legal representative, as it ‘would perpetuate the negativism of anonymous and questionable content’. And we were prepared to take that advice – but no longer. When malicious, slanderous and untrue statements are made about my Company, my staff, and my family…..enough is enough, and I am retaliating.

Jill,

I can feel your frustration through your post and can't hope to understand the anguish/negative impact all these posts have had on you and your colleagues/family. However, in my humble opinion, you should really delete/edit your post, your colleagues and legal representative were right to tell you not to respond to forum comments, it does indeed perpetuate negativity. This follow up post explaining your position does not help, it only helps to feed the negativity surrounding this thread. Reading the post makes me feel that you lack maturity in handling criticism and shows me your inexperience in managing your online presence/reputation (particularly ASF, which is not very forgiving when it comes to promoting products/business).

As a business owner, you also need to mentally prepare yourself and accept that you will be criticised - especially in an online forum/social media where anonymity is widespread. All companies get criticised, Apple, Google, Coles, CBA etc. It's how you respond to such criticism that will define you (by not feeding it further and justifying your position).

The damage has already been done - in the past by the past employees that started posting in this thread (if they were actually employees). Your energy would be best spent focusing on building your business, making it better etc. This will improve your credibility and the credibility of your business - the results will then speak for itself, especially if your clients can achieve the returns you claim they can achieve.

Just my 2c.

 

[Boggo]

.....

Beware any businesses out there who choose to do the same! ( not that I think any true business owners would read this forum)

and if I were you I would edit that bit out.

I think you completely underestimate the quality and backgrounds etc of quite a few posters on this site.

This is not another ramp and dump site, try elsewhere for that.

 

[Porper]

I also challenge ASF to place this post where many past enquirers can see it, and hopefully see another side of this thread, instead of the dubious and untrue comments made. I note in ASF’s Code of Conduct, the following statement ‘Any information that you post must be true or accurate to the best of your knowledge’. I also note in my ‘Welcome’ email from ASF describing ASF as’ a positive and constructive online community and we expect everyone to treat other members with both courtesy and respect. If only that were true!

The trouble is the damage has been done...rightly or wrongly. Sharemarket College has a very poor reputation. Your long winded post has added to the negative sentiment. As others state, you are better off concentrating on your business and not responding to past employees looking to expose you...or lie as you state. We can all make our own minds up in that respect.

 

[Supporter]

Re sad

The trouble is the damage has been done...rightly or wrongly. Sharemarket College has a very poor reputation. Your long winded post has added to the negative sentiment. As others state, you are better off concentrating on your business and not responding to past employees looking to expose you...or lie as you state. We can all make our own minds up in that respect.

Man give the people a break. Jill's been good enough to answer everything best she can. Obviously honest or they would leave the country with all your money. For all the slander that's been revealed you could hardly blame them. I agree $15 k does sound a lot of money at first glance, but as explained in some detail by old mate. I think it's a bargain. Whatever these sites should be banned if you can go about destroying businesses without any proof. World is a sad place , everyone hides behind the computer. Man up people, go talk face to face. Kind regards

 

[Happyat1]

Hi
I am a very new investor and noticed this thread from the Sharemarket College dating back to 2005. I just signed up for the 12 month course and unfortunately found this thread afterwards. I have read everything to date and the Directors replies and am now very uncertain if I have done the right thing. I have emailed my accountant to find out if I can claim the course cost through my SMSF which I have just set up so can update the forum once I have an answer. But I am interested in feedback from people who have actually done the course and whether they made gains or losses once trading? Thanks kindly

 

[RT14]

It has been a while and oh looky here, Jill has posted! Looks like the old gal has come on out to defend the indefensible.

Answer me this: My wife and I were pitched some SMSF platform from a business somehow joined with the owners called FIWS something. Where has the website gone? (http://www.fiws.com.au/#!projects/c1vw1) For the record, we ran a mile, called up our friends at the College and they also ran a mile after being asked for money from the owners too! Look here!

Then I did a quick google on ASIC (this old dog is getting clever with google) and this popped up: (http://www2.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-...=&a7=&a8=&a9=&a10=&a11=&a12=&a13=&start_date=)

Did FIWS something change to MYTAG Group? Did MYTAG Group then change to My Trusted Advisory Group? (http://www.smsfm.com.au) Why the big hoo-haa run-around?

Lastly, have a looksy at the contact details on the My Trusted Advisor Group website. Exactly the same as SMC looky looky here!

To quote the amazing Pauline Hanson "Please explain?"

 

[Wysiwyg]

To quote the amazing Pauline Hanson "Please explain?"

Who are they targeting? The website and (breakfast table ) video presentation refer to "client". Seems like they're appealing to administrators of Self Managed Super Fund.

 

[pixel]

Did FIWS something change to MYTAG Group? Did MYTAG Group then change to My Trusted Advisory Group? (http://www.smsfm.com.au) Why the big hoo-haa run-around?

Lastly, have a looksy at the contact details on the My Trusted Advisor Group website. Exactly the same as SMC looky looky here!

To quote the amazing Pauline Hanson "Please explain?"

The way I read the ASIC page: SMC are the original Licensee, the three entities below are their authorised reps. Nothing unusual about that. The only question that might raise is: Why run three different outfits that give the impression of separate "Trusted Advisors"? But that needn't be anything sinister either: Call it three "departments" that hold the license, which makes it easier to have changing staff members operate under the license, rather than running back to ASIC every time a consultant quits or joins new.

I did notice the date though: The SMC has been operating far longer than since 2009. I know that Jill has been training investors in the use of T/A software at least since 1999. Our paths crossed again in 2007. Of course, that may have been covered by a different licensing regime, if one had been required at all.

 

[RT14]

View attachment 66501

The way I read the ASIC page: SMC are the original Licensee, the three entities below are their authorised reps. Nothing unusual about that. The only question that might raise is: Why run three different outfits that give the impression of separate "Trusted Advisors"? But that needn't be anything sinister either: Call it three "departments" that hold the license, which makes it easier to have changing staff members operate under the license, rather than running back to ASIC every time a consultant quits or joins new.

I did notice the date though: The SMC has been operating far longer than since 2009. I know that Jill has been training investors in the use of T/A software at least since 1999. Our paths crossed again in 2007. Of course, that may have been covered by a different licensing regime, if one had been required at all.

Looky here!

After going through all the rigmarole of searching websites I found it a bit of a confusion on my behalf that the business I was asked to give money to (FIWS something a rather) had nothing on that website about Sharemarket College and vice versa. After another looksy from a few 'Collegites' we were all completed silent on why one business and another business owned by the same people did not connect the dots. This is both before and after the business changed names making this husband and wife combo a little befuddled.

The moral of the story is STAY AWAY FROM THESE PEOPLE EVERYONE!

More to come my fellow education-ites! :-/

 

[RT14]

Hi
I am a very new investor and noticed this thread from the Sharemarket College dating back to 2005. I just signed up for the 12 month course and unfortunately found this thread afterwards. I have read everything to date and the Directors replies and am now very uncertain if I have done the right thing. I have emailed my accountant to find out if I can claim the course cost through my SMSF which I have just set up so can update the forum once I have an answer. But I am interested in feedback from people who have actually done the course and whether they made gains or losses once trading? Thanks kindly

Looky here!

We were told we could pay for the 'course' out of our Superannuation nest-eggy after initially purchasing the 'course' out of our personal money and reimburse from Superannuation back to personal. A big no no said Mr. Taxman and Taxwoman!

A group of us were rightly pissed off, out of pocket and have taken action so those involved cannot escape.

We're here. We aren't going anywhere.

PM me for more info's

 

[RT14]

OK – you’ve got me!

B]Mis-statements
1. Yes, Karl Scott slept at the office on two occasions – “Prawn Trader’ obviously didn’t sleep with him, or he would have learnt that it was the result of an altercation with his girlfriend and subsequent copious intake of alcohol! – it made for some jocularity around the office and even made our blog! Oh, and if there was someone saying you would make millions out of trading CFDs, then you should run a mile! Our main course units concentrate on equity trading and investment strategies, as well as Exchange Traded Options. We educate our members in the risks of CFDs and very rarely promote them except for risk management purposes.

Looky here!

The same Karl Scott as this?

https://applications.lsc.qld.gov.au/documents/SCOTTQCAT15-402.pdf

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/43963866b79371b71a57f97fddffe275

This is the man, the myth and the legend?

https://au.linkedin.com/in/karlscott

We told you we were not going away.

We're here.

 

[RT14]

OK – you’ve got me!
Yes – I am Jill Rogers, Co-owner of SMC , Responsible Manager of our AFSL, and Principal of our RTO - and I am not hiding behind an alias, like the former poster ‘Prawn Trader’.
Both Graeme and I, as SMC owners, have had much advice not to post replies on this forum from colleagues and legal representative, as it ‘would perpetuate the negativism of anonymous and questionable content’. And we were prepared to take that advice – but no longer. When malicious, slanderous and untrue statements are made about my Company, my staff, and my family…..enough is enough, and I am retaliating.
How interesting that Prawn Trader knows so many ‘facts’ about SMC and the financial industry – makes me wonder if he is an ex-employee who is being investigated for activities which represent ‘questionable’ ethics. However, I am not going to be dragged down to a level of innuendo BUT I am going to honestly answer the poisonous, untrue and slanderous statements made in this previous post.
.

Well that is a right pretty speech there Jill.

Enough is not enough and we know all.

In coming days we will be posting again and taking an axe to your posts.

We're here.

 

[mjim]

Re: Trading educators!

Some years ago lot of dodgy snake oil sales people were in this "business" remember names like Trader's System International, Traders International, Your Trading room etc , 21st xxxx groups then ASIC woke up ( perhaps half awake still) some were closed down some started "renting AFSL" and got back in to business making it just legit.

What amzess me is how people are gullible! One simple question any and everybody should be asking
- IF the so called "Guru" and his/ her magic wand is so successful how come
a) he/she is selling the "system"
b) Why he /she / company/ salesperson doe snot show actual audited proof of past performance? NOT a glossy brochure but audited proof by a large a/c firm
c) If it really works why are they not doing a licences managed fund?
Most will run away or give all sort of evasive answers
In fact I am thinking of starting a business of "How to spot a TGTBT schemes"
My catch phrase will be "pay 1000 to save 15000"
$1000 anybody.... going going gone
https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/investing/investment-warnings/investment-seminars
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...our-trading-room/story-e6frg906-1226325292597

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-02/questions-raised-over-wealth-generator/4606044

 

[RT14]

So Jill, are you able to confirm that the Karl Scott in question is the Karl Scott that was charged with misconduct by the Legal Services Commission?

The same Karl Scott that was removed from the local roll of legal practitioners?

The same same Karl Scott that disbursed monies from a Client Trust Account to settle personal debts and other business ventures?

The same same same Karl Scott that is employed by you?

Clear things up here old girl. The floor is yours.