We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Platform News: FSA confirm ban on platform rebates
Comments
-
yes, the danger is that commission will pop up again in a new disguise. but if the FSA gets it right, they can prevent that.
i'm not saying they will get it right, i'm saying it's possible
0 -
grey_gym_sock wrote: »i'm not saying they will get it right, i'm saying it's possible
The financial industry loves hiding fees and misleading regards risk, so I don't expect the game of "whack a mole" to end any time soon.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
they will all go up that much faster, instead of being content to track their benchmarks like they do now.
When aggregated, they *are* the index. The lag behind the index is because of the fees they extract to buy their yachts. so lower fees should equal less lag.So all the money not going into platform and trail commissions will really and truly get back to the investor and not somehow evaporate somewhere in the financial services industry.
They will kick and struggle. Many attempts will be made to ensure yacht purchasing power isn't impaired. Preventing this is down to individual investors, and lazy investors who rely on the industry rather than their own cunning will continue to lose out IMO.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »They will kick and struggle. Many attempts will be made to ensure yacht purchasing power isn't impaired. Preventing this is down to individual investors, and lazy investors who rely on the industry rather than their own cunning will continue to lose out IMO.
It's a bit of a generalisation to consider this ban to effect everyone in the financial industry.... and that they all like to buy yachts...0 -
premierfella wrote: »explicit charges for funds that previously had charges "hidden" in the AMC.
Hidden in the AMC? Nothing can be hidden in the AMC!
Anything that doesn't belong in the AMC is hidden in the TER. Of course, some costs don't fit into the TER either, and GOK what they amount to!I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
and that they all like to buy yachts...
Where are the client's yachts?
Sorry, but to properly serve investors, the investment industry needs to be lean and mean but instead it's grown fat and lazy. Things need to change, and this saggy old industry isn't going to like this change, so there will be much gnashing of teeth and veritable floods of crocodile tears.
Bring it on.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
Back to certificates then.premierfella wrote: »XO brokers could also be forced to change their pricing for other reasons
Now all we need is for some firm to hold our certificates in a database, and make arrangements with the registrars and brokers to trade electronically. They could call it Crust or something.
This will save the registrars and brokers a fortune, especially if it supports fully automated online trading by investors, and automated dividend processing, so that staff time costs for most customers are minimal.
In fact, it'll be so cheap that the brokers will be able to reduce their charges."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
This presumably explains why Alliance Trust Savings has just hiked its fees considerably. Details here.
Although I had been under the impression that they already rebated all the commission they received, so I had hoped that they would not need to change their fees when commission was abolished. Looks like they must've been relying on keeping at least some of the platform commission up till now.koru0 -
This presumably explains why Alliance Trust Savings has just hiked its fees considerably. Details here.
Although I had been under the impression that they already rebated all the commission they received, so I had hoped that they would not need to change their fees when commission was abolished. Looks like they must've been relying on keeping at least some of the platform commission up till now.
Their fee hike may be due to poor financial performance as their charging structure already rebated all commission. IIRC they are making losses and need to turn that around.
edit: some details of their losses here
Alliance’s other subsidiary business is the investment platform Alliance Trust Savings (ATS). Garrett-Cox told investors in the interim statement that it was performing well, with a 30 per cent rise in accounts, helping it to an 18 per cent growth in revenues while costs remained flat. That meant losses fell from £2.6 million to £1.5 million.0 -
Their fee hike may be due to poor financial performance as their charging structure already rebated all commission. IIRC they are making losses and need to turn that around.
The levies this year have been far higher than expected and the cost of liability is increasing as are the solvency requirements.
There are expectations that some platforms will fail and go to the wall. Most are loss making even in the days when they kept some or all of the trail commission, let alone the platform commission. Post RDR/platform review, their charges need to rise or risk going under or they need volume.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards