Anyone been to an IFA and not been advised to buy Unit Trusts?

qpop

Why do people insist on feeding this troll?

1)He will not offer any kind of debate, he just wants the attention of an argument

2)You can't "win" an argument with a troll. Just by getting you to arguing on their terms, they will be sure they've "won".

3)It's been shown that darkpool (and, for that matter, other anti-financial-services trolls) don't have any idea about portfolio analysis, the different elements of risk involved in investment etc. and therefore think that the only measure of a portfolios success is raw return. It's futile trying to explain otherwise because, quite frankly, I think they're either too stupid to understand, or too ignorant to want to learn.

4)Until darkpool provides full back-dated evidence of his portfolio including all trades and commissions, rather than vague statements about how he's magically quadrupled his money, nobody need bother rising to this drivel.

In conclusion; PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS

gadgetmind

darkpool wrote: »

If I was advising a friend/ relative etc about investment I would suggest a portfolio of blue chip shares to start with, and if they had millions I would suggest commercial property. I wouldn't suggest a UT etc as I believe the fees are simply not worth it.

Maybe, but only if they had a significant sum, an appetite for risk, and the ability to understand corporate actions.

DiggerUK

qpop wrote: »

......It's been shown that...anti-financial-services trolls, don't have any idea about portfolio analysis..... and think that the only measure of a portfolios success is raw return......

As opposed to what....raw losses???

The use of the term 'balanced portfolio' is a piece of jargon that sounds deeply meaningfull, but is nothing more than sexed up sales spin.
It amounts to no more than a policy of; buy a piece of as many financial products as you can, and hope some of them come up trumps.
..._

qpop

DiggerUK wrote: »

As opposed to what....raw losses???

The use of the term 'balanced portfolio' is a piece of jargon that sounds deeply meaningfull, but is nothing more than sexed up sales spin.
It amounts to no more than a policy of; buy a piece of as many financial products as you can, and hope some of them come up trumps.
..._

I started writing a reply involving standard deviation analysis, various risk-adjusted return ratios, and geographical data, and then realised I was ignoring my own advice. Therefore, feel free to rant to yourself, I'm not going to partake.

Rollinghome

qpop wrote: »

I started writing a reply involving standard deviation analysis, various risk-adjusted return ratios, and geographical data, and then realised I was ignoring my own advice. Therefore, feel free to rant to yourself, I'm not going to partake.

Well thank you for telling us of the words of wisdom you are not going to post. But had it occurred to you that if you really had anything remotely sensible to say then it would have made more sense to post it rather make a pointless non-post?

Yes, we are also quite aware that that you are ignoring your own advice without you pointing that out. It's something you frequently do when demanding that others don't post to any threads that are critical of the rightly much criticised industry you say you work in.

However you seem to have misunderstood the point of this board and perhaps message boards in general.

Feel free to ignore your own advice as usual if you must, but please, think of something sensible to say first.

qpop

Rollinghome wrote: »

Well thank you for telling us the words of wisdom you are not going to post. But had it occurred to you that if you really had anything remotely sensible to say then it would have made more sense to post it rather make a pointless non-post?

We are also quite aware that that you are ignoring your own advice without you pointing that out. It's something you frequently do when demanding that others don't post to any threads that are critical of the rightly much criticised industry you say you work in.

However you seem to have misunderstood the point of this board and perhaps message boards in general.

Feel free to ignore your own advice as usual if you must, but please, think of something sensible to say first.

You make sound points rollinghome, I don't think you're prone to trolling and would probably appreciate some lively debate on the matter.

The fact is, like most in the industry, who plan to remain past 2012, I've spent a lot of time and effort learning the mathematics behind investment risk. To be told by an idiot that advisers sell unit trusts when far better "advice" would be a small portfolio of blue chip shares borders on insulting. What has resulted isn't a debate, but an argument, which is both cyclic and pointless.

Were there an opportunity to debate the pro's and cons of individual sharedealing, tracker investing, closed vs open ended investment companies, etc, then I'd jump at the opportunity, as I have a lot to say, a lot to listen to, and a lot to learn, on the matters (as do we all).

So, I'd hazard a guess that in fact you have misinterpreted the point of online message boards, particularly (it would seem) this one, and particularly the few users that repeatedly bring up these topics with no intention to listen or argue with any amount of humility.

The point of the boards, it would seem, to some, is to see who can shout the loudest.

Rollinghome

qpop wrote: »

So, I'd hazard a guess that in fact you have misinterpreted the point of online message boards, particularly (it would seem) this one, and particularly the few users that repeatedly bring up these topics with no intention to listen or argue with any amount of humility.

Well I hope not because as it happens I own and operate one of the best-known message boards on the internet - though not one concerned with finance.

What a board shouldn't be used for is to have vested interests deliberately mislead other users for the purpose of promoting their industry - which, imho, happens too often on this board. If you are going to promote your industry here you need to do so with a little more subtlety and tolerance of those who disagree with you.

Glad to hear you're studying, good luck with that, and I certainly hope we'll get rid of at least some of the rogues and salesmen post-2012 and that purely sales-driven advice will become less common. I do have quite a bit of experience of both IFAs and stockbrokers and have been fairly shocked at the poor level of competence and dishonesty so I can tell you there is still a long way to go.

qpop

Rollinghome wrote: »

Well I hope not because as it happens I own and operate one of the best-known message boards on the internet - though not one concerned with finance.

What a board shouldn't be used for is to have vested interests deliberately mislead other users for the purpose of promoting their industry - which, imho, happens too often on this board. If you are going to promote your industry here you need to do so with a little more subtlety and tolerance of those who disagree with you.

Glad to hear you're studying, good luck with that, and I certainly hope we'll get rid of at least some of the rogues and salesmen post-2012 and that purely sales-driven advice will become less common. I do have quite a bit of experience of both IFAs and stockbrokers and have been fairly shocked at the poor level of competence and dishonesty so I can tell you there is still a long way to go.

Well I'd hope that you're intelligent enough to realise that your own anecdotal evidence doesn't equate to the industry as a whole.

And, as an owner of a large message board, I can only imagine you're more aware than most that few favour an actual discussion over a shouting match (as evident in these kind of threads)

My vocal disilke of a select few here and their inflamatory comments doesn't stem from their opinions of the industry I work in, but from the idiocy they demonstrate in these kind of arguments.

Rollinghome

qpop wrote: »

Well I'd hope that you're intelligent enough to realise that your own anecdotal evidence doesn't equate to the industry as a whole.

Indeed, and hope that you are intelligent enough to realise while it doesn't equate to the industry as a whole it is most certainly likely to be very representative of the industry and its problems. Problems that the FSA has recognised and hopes to make a first step in addressing with the soon to be implemented RDR.

Or perhaps you have not experienced first-hand, as I have, how IFAs attempt to make their sales?

Yet another mis-selling scandal in the news today where the average age of the victims was 83 years old. The supposedly independent advice of course involved NHFA, owned by HSBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16030451

The cry will no doubt go up that this was a bank and not us but of course 95% of IFAs are ex bank and insurance salesmen who continue with the same sales techniques and standards of morality they learned there.

Neither is it a surprise that the salesmen who have benefitted from the current system insist that there are no problems and that the RDR reforms are unnecessary.

fairleads

qpop wrote: »

To be told by an idiot that advisers sell unit trusts when far better "advice" would be a small portfolio of blue chip shares borders on insulting.

But you've fallen into the same trap. And why do you find the advice bordering on insult? I don't.