Affordable IFA advice

Lokolo

Rollinghome wrote: »

Representatives of companies or commercial organisations are not allowed to post to this board without the permission of MSE. Your position seems to be that you would have no objection provided they do so dishonestly or covertly - which I see as a totally absurd argument.

Er no. Bowlhead said nothing of the sort, he (she?) stated that it doesn't matter WHY they are on here, just telling you that they are what they are is good enough for you to then make an informed decision.

Dunston is an IFA. He has declared himself an IFA.

Permissioned users say they are from X company. They don't state whether they are being paid by MSE or other organisations to post here.

There's no difference.

Rollinghome

gadgetmind wrote: »

Do not forbid that which you cannot prevent.

It's an argument but I can't see rape and murder being legalised any time soon.

bowlhead99

jimjames wrote: »

I think it is splitting hairs and irrelevant to be honest. There are 2 definitions of being paid to post here:

3) he is self employed and paying himself to post ?

I'm not paid to post but am now inspired to take a well earned reward!. Perhaps I should raid my Christmas savings pot and take a pound for every post this year. That should be enough to buy a few nice presents for family and friends. Should almost cover the resulting shortfall in my Christmas savings pot.

Re MSE rules, I take the point that permissioned users come on and represent their organisations with the blessing of the site in line with whatever guidelines they are given. Dh and other IFAs don't mention the name of their practice by name, so far as I can see.

If they are not purporting to represent any one firm over another, but simply exhibit some kind of bias towards the IFA way of thinking, while having "I'm an IFA" in their signature, so I can see that they might be biased to the IFA way of thinking, so I can take measures to protect myself against this heinous bias, I am ok with that.

With that "safeguard" in place, if Dh pays himself a pound a post plus £50k for his real-world work, or a penny a post plus £100k a year, or two pounds a post and zero per year, I don't actually care, as long as the posts are generally useful. Likewise if the person paying the penny or pound is a third party - my life doesn't change much because the safeguard (my knowledge of his potential bias from using an IFA way of looking at it) is still in place. If I grow tired of hearing the IFA perspective I can filter them and only read posts which don't say they're from IFAs.

As it is, I don't have anyone on filter because I like the range of (sometimes conflicting) views here which helps give me a balanced view of the world. So I hear the pro IFA view from some and the anti from others. The pro tracker view from some and the pro managed from others. And so on. You can be sure that certain posters will react to certain types of posts in certain ways if they are logged on within a few days after they happenand nobody else has made their point for them.

With so many views out there I do find it surprising when people cannot comprehend why someone would want to follow one or the other even if they themselves are not attracted to the viewpoint.

Alenna

grizzly1911 wrote: »

In the OP you mentioned a small pot of £30k. In another you mention £17k cash & 24k cash ISA. Here you mention £12k being retained in cash, but this may not be enough. Is this £12k separate or part of the £17k?

The 30K is the lump sum I got from my pension, some of which I have put into my cash ISA. I have a few other bits of saving spread about, hence the confusion. The 12K is in another account and not part of the 17K. I think that I will tell the IFA that I only want to invest the 30k and keep a good reserve of cash as I have some possible medium term expenditure.