Drop in well paid using IFA's

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

Rule 1. Never Pay 3% a year on fees to some charlatans.

Rule 2 : Pay 0.5%pa when you could pay 0.2%/0.3%pa for a comparable UT tracker.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=51004177&postcount=42

qpop

darkpool wrote: »

Rule 1. Never Pay 3% a year on fees to some charlatans.

I'm sorry, but that just isn't good enough.

Let's see some results, some charts of your total returns in the last, say, 5 or 10 years. Let's see you qualify the advice you give so vehemently.

After all, it's only fair. These "charlatans" in the OEIC industry have to. A monthly report giving updates on the fund, it's top holdings, etc. Easily accessible charts showing the return against a suitable benchmark (importantly, NET OF ALL CHARGES).

Until you post something that demonstrates your supposed expertise, how can anybody possibly expect you to be anything more than a troll?

darkpool

qpop wrote: »

Until you post something that demonstrates your supposed expertise, how can anybody possibly expect you to be anything more than a troll?

you not think it likely that i will have better returns since my annual fees are soooooooo much lower than 3%?

dunstonh

darkpool wrote: »

you not think it likely that i will have better returns since my annual fees are soooooooo much lower than 3%?

No. There is no way of knowing that.

Is it better to pay 0.5% and get 5% a year after charges or better to pay 1.5% and get 7% a year after charges? You dont know if you will get 7% but that is the choice you make. In some cases you will, in some you wont. My experience with portfolio building is that you get more right than wrong if you put enough research into it. You dont know it in advance though but it is an individual decision to make. It is not right or wrong. It is opinion.

qpop

darkpool wrote: »

you not think it likely that i will have better returns since my annual fees are soooooooo much lower than 3%?

No, I don't think that's likely at all.

In fact, I think your returns have probably been mediocre over the medium-to-long term, a thought which becomes more certain every time you avoid posting any evidence whatsoever of your supposed success.

----

To look at the other side of a coin, let's take an example of an expensive OEIC, with an AMC of 1.75% and TER of 1.9%, which invests in emerging markets (expensive due to market inefficiency/corruption), with currency risk etc. to further pollute returns.

What do you think the annualised return is likely to be, NET OF ALL CHARGES?

439% over the last ten years?

BUT HOW? It's an expensive fund! What kind of voodoo magic has been undertaken? How did those "charlatans" do it?

http://www.trustnet.com/Tools/Charting.aspx?typeCode=FAFEMA,XU:GLO

Your arguments are both one-dimensional and inaccurate.

darkpool

jem16 wrote: »

Rule 2 : Pay 0.5%pa when you could pay 0.2%/0.3%pa for a comparable UT tracker.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=51004177&postcount=42

LOL!

i hope you're not a lawyer!

"i reckon including alllllll costs i pay well under 0.5% a year"

ie well under.....

qpop

darkpool wrote: »

LOL!

i hope you're not a lawyer!

"i reckon including alllllll costs i pay well under 0.5% a year"

ie well under.....

I hope you've so far avoided answering my questions and addressing the points I've made in the last couple of posts because you're collating your performance information into something coherent for people to have a look at.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

"i reckon including alllllll costs i pay well under 0.5% a year"

ie well under.....

Why pick 0.5% then if you really meant "well under 0.5%". More bluff and fluster I think since the cost of a UT tracker was pointed out to you.

2010

'Expert' IFA invested half of 97yo's cash in Keydata.

An IFA who writes a weekly money advice column for a regional newspaper is contesting a complaint that he wrongfully invested more than half of a 97-year-old woman's assets in Keydata.

At 5% commission, RK Shipman was paid £11,500 by Keydata for the advice.

Just 52 days after the daughters acted on the advice, on 8 June 2009, the FSA put Keydata into administration, suspending all interest payments and leaving investors unable to access their capital.

Read more: http://www.ifaonline.co.uk/ifaonline/news/2104319/expert-ifa-invested-half-97yos-cash-keydata#ixzz1mGMvw3B9

2010

Millions of savers don't know whether they are being charged by their financial adviser when they buy investment products.
According to a YouGov survey, four out of five British savers have no idea that they might be paying commission that is deducted from their investments each year, which is known as trail commission.
These annual payments, taken from the value of investments and paid to the independent financial advisers (IFAs) who set up the policies, are worth an estimated £1.6bn a year.

Mr Massow said: "These findings fly in the face of claims that consumers have full knowledge of the charges they pay. The respondents here aren't random members of the public, but those who actually use IFAs."
Earlier this year, the Financial Blissful Ignorance Monitor, a monthly index of savers' awareness, showed that one in two bank customers is also unaware what commissions they pay.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/8799554/Trail-commission-Whats-that.html