Aberdeen takeover of Interactive Investor

Alexland

older_and_no_wiser said:

Yes, it's a great deal of ongoing cost saving for those who've built up a large portfolio.

I'm more of an ETF person so it looks expensive compared to iWeb (ISAs) or Fidelity (SIPPs).

itm2

Alexland said:

older_and_no_wiser said:

Yes, it's a great deal of ongoing cost saving for those who've built up a large portfolio.

I'm more of an ETF person so it looks expensive compared to iWeb (ISAs) or Fidelity (SIPPs).

I have accounts with both II and iWeb. iWeb is probably slightly lower cost, but has a significantly poorer choice of funds. Alot of the most popular funds/ITs/ETFs are available, so it will probably be fine for most people, but I've frequently had to go to II in the past for investments which are not offered by iWeb.

Robert_McGeddon

Alexland said:

older_and_no_wiser said:

• Pricing will remain the same.
  

That's a shame as if they made it a bit more attractive I would be tempted.

I guess it works for people holding funds.

Not bad for SIPPs in drawdown either.

Alexland

itm2 said:

I have accounts with both II and iWeb. iWeb is probably slightly lower cost, but has a significantly poorer choice of funds. Alot of the most popular funds/ITs/ETFs are available, so it will probably be fine for most people, but I've frequently had to go to II in the past for investments which are not offered by iWeb.

Yes if you want the less mainstream stuff II/AJB/HL have a better selection but then we now tend to stick to the big liquid ETFs which can be easily traded in scale without affecting the price. In the past we have had to place multiple trades to get rid of an investment at a reasonable price.

Malchester

itm2 said:

marlot said:

itm2 said:

molerat said:

You mean Abrdn ............

Yes of course. Apologies for the unauthorised inclusion of vowels

I wonder what do they can call ii after they've removed its vowels?

ntrctvnvstr of course. Rolls off the tongue

I think you mean rlls ff th tng