Who do IFAs use for independent financial advice?

Lokolo

gadgetmind wrote: »

None of us can see the backs of our own heads, nor is reflection usually sufficient to know what happens within.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_self-reflection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_(computer_programming)

I hope you !!!!!!s follow these links I post as you might actually learn something!

Wow when did you turn into such a !!!!?

Lokolo

Aegis wrote: »

I think it's more like asking a mechanic who they get to service their car. Realistically there's no point in paying someone to do something you do for a living for you unless there's a major barrier (i.e. being unable to see the back of your own head well enough to cut it).

So according to these guys a plumber has to call out a plumber to fix all his plumbing needs?

A gardener can't fix up his garden, he can only hire someone else to do it....

Seriously, you anti IFA posters lose all credibility when you post crap like this.

gadgetmind

Lokolo wrote: »

Wow when did you turn into such a !!!!?

Um, sorry. There is a teeny chance that I'd had a teeny drink!

Lokolo

gadgetmind wrote: »

Um, sorry. There is a teeny chance that I'd had a teeny drink!

Haha that's OK then

wriggly

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Perhaps they tell the punters to put the bulk in equities but then put most of their own in cash ?

It's more likely they tell the punters to put the bulk in high-commission paying funds and other opaque instruments, but then put most of their own money in cheap index funds.

I do wonder about the "advisors" at banks, though. Do they know enough to avoid drinking their own Kool-Aid?

Aegis

wriggly wrote: »

It's more likely they tell the punters to put the bulk in high-commission paying funds and other opaque instruments, but then put most of their own money in cheap index funds.

What would be the point in this when adviser charging allows IFAs to take the exact same commission from index funds as from "commission paying funds and opaque instruments"?

If you're going to go on the offensive, at least do so for a valid reason. With client agreed remuneration in place for years, there hasn't been a legitimate argument about commission being the driving factor when IFAs select investments for years.

For the record, my portfolio is made up of a combination of active and passive, just like those I recommend for clients.

westy22

Aegis wrote: »

With client agreed remuneration in place for years, there hasn't been a legitimate argument about commission being the driving factor when IFAs select investments for years.

Firstly, I'm not an IFA-basher although I don't use one myself, but the fact that client agreed remuneration has been in place for years doesn't mean that all IFAs and FAs are using it or telling their clients about it!

dunstonh

westy22 wrote: »

Aegis wrote: »

With client agreed remuneration in place for years, there hasn't been a legitimate argument about commission being the driving factor when IFAs select investments for years.

Firstly, I'm not an IFA-basher although I don't use one myself, but the fact that client agreed remuneration has been in place for years doesn't mean that all IFAs and FAs are using it or telling their clients about it!

FAs certainly not but most investment contracts have been explicitly charged for many years now.