Why do I have such a turnover of St James Place Pension Advisors?

WSB

Firstly, I don't want to discuss how rubbish or expensive SJP funds are (I am currently looking into this as separate matter).

Just have the following simple question.

I've been with SJP since 1998 and have had the same fund throughout.  Never changed a thing.

What I'm interested to know is why I have had so many different SJP allocated pension advisors during this time? Recently, one per year in the last 3 years.

I have my suspicions but wanted to throw this one question out there to get people's opinions.

Please don't get into a discussion about the cons and cons of SJP.  I'm looking into this separately.

Many thanks!

dunstonh

What I'm interested to know is why I have had so many different SJP allocated pension advisors during this time? Recently, one per year in the last 3 years.

Sales reps have a higher turnover.  Especially amongst newly qualified.  Over half of new advisers to the industry leave within 2 years as they cannot make a living out of it.     If they don't deliver the goods, they either get pushed out or they fall out themselves.

WSB

dunstonh said:

What I'm interested to know is why I have had so many different SJP allocated pension advisors during this time? Recently, one per year in the last 3 years.

Sales reps have a higher turnover.  Especially amongst newly qualified.  Over half of new advisers to the industry leave within 2 years as they cannot make a living out of it.     If they don't deliver the goods, they either get pushed out or they fall out themselves.

What did you mean by "deliver the goods"?
Would I be correct in saying that as I haven't made changes to my funds etc, they have nothing to do, hence can't make some form of commission?
I really struggle to see what their actual role entails. As you say, sales reps.
Although apparently they are qualified in the area of financial advice, whatever that means. 

dunstonh

Would I be correct in saying that as I haven't made changes to my funds etc, they have nothing to do, hence can't make some form of commission?

My understanding is that SJP reps do not portfolio build.   So, they don't make any changes unless it is risk-related.

In your case, its pre 2013, so there will be an ongoing commission to whoever, the SJP agent is.    Periodically, they will likely be looking to see if there are opportunities to increase and earn more.

I really struggle to see what their actual role entails. As you say, sales reps.
Although apparently they are qualified in the area of financial advice, whatever that means. 

Think, of one group being financial advisers without any sales pressure and the other being financial advisers with sales pressure on them.

Albermarle

I guess if they do not get enough new clients/business and lose more, they get pushed out.
In general selling does not suit everybody, so some will come in all enthusiastic and get disillusioned.
Then the successful ones  maybe get bored with after they have bought their fourth Porsche on the back of SJP high fees ( sorry couldn't resist  )

gm0

A lot of different size small firms right down to individual partners (sole trader limiteds) with one adviser and secretarial support) have worked with SJP the behemoth wealth management brand and product seller.  

I am confident the "portfolio" of little companies crowded around them has changed shape as they have grown so massive but have no data on the demographics of it.  I doubt this is readily available public information (A large pile of confidential B2B contracts at SJP HQ)

I would suggest that no two client experiences will be the same in this respect i.e. visible to customer staff turnover. 

A larger practice of more corporate shape - farming adviser trainees with a deal of low pay  for gained experience while they skill up.  With a number of such people and a long client list. May have higher churn. 

And a smaller one with only one or two keen not retiring soon more senior advisers who effectively are (and own and operate) a tied wealth management advice business (with admin support + the SJP contract/central back office behind) and a shorter client list - may well not change the visible face for a decade plus. 

Your mileage as they say - may vary.

If you don't care for the lack of continuity of the bit you deal with then that is another strike in the "cons" column of dealing with them.   They are what they are. 

Of course the fact that your adviser disappears and another one pops up in place - like the Airplane autopilot - is (to some) arguably one of the advantages of dealing with somebody larger (FA or IFA) who isn't a sole trader who just went off sick and who has messy record keeping and no immediate successor is forthcoming.

à chacun son goût

DullGreyGuy

WSB said:

What I'm interested to know is why I have had so many different SJP allocated pension advisors during this time? Recently, one per year in the last 3 years.

Unless you are a whale then you're allocated to the person on the bottom rung of the ladder. There is vast turnover of bottom end roles between those that realise its not for them, some that are ok so switch companies for more money and those that are good who move on to bigger things. 

 I get weekly LinkedIn requests from SJP associates saying about what they can do for my financial planning. A quick period check shows very few are still with SJP after a year.

dunstonh said:

Would I be correct in saying that as I haven't made changes to my funds etc, they have nothing to do, hence can't make some form of commission?

My understanding is that SJP reps do not portfolio build.   So, they don't make any changes unless it is risk-related.

This is really stretching my sphere of knowledge... my understanding was different, depending on exactly what you mean by "portfolio"? Customers or investments?

An associate is a "senior partner" or whatever the SJP terminology is for an experienced sales guy. He's closing in on retirement and has been "selling" his low value/high volume clients to others whilst his eldest son qualifies and intends to "pass on" the residual portfolio of high value clients to him 

wjr4

High sales targets as they are sales people. A local IFA won’t have sales targets usually. 

Bright_Star85

We have been with SJP for almost 20 years. Over that period of time we have had 3 advisors. The first one sadly passed away. The second retired and the 3rd one has been advising our family investments and trusts for 12 years. 
And I can honestly say hand on heart they have been absolutely fantastic. 
My advice would be to ask your advisor directly and if he or she doesn't fill you with confidence then do something over it. Speak to the owner of the company over your concerns or even move your investments. 

Usually there is always a valid answer behind every story. 

I feel I had to put my 2p worth in as all this thread has been about as well as others is slagging SJP off on the structure and advisors sales which is absolutely disgraceful. You have to ask yourself the question, why are SJP the market leaders in the financial sector. It speaks volumes for me and my family's investments. 
I wish you well on.

QrizB

Bright_Star85 said:

We have been with SJP for almost 20 years.

Over which time you've paid them about 30% of your investments? I'm sure they love you.

Bright_Star85 said:

You have to ask yourself the question, why are SJP the market leaders in the financial sector.

Much the same reason why Starbucks are the market leaders in the retail hot beverage sector.

Do they have the best coffee? Do they have the cheapest coffee? Do they have the most attentive staff?

Or do they have usually-clean, usually-smart and mostly-reliable coffee shops on every high street, backed by a multi-million-pound advertising budget?

Starbucks isn't a terrible decision when you're deciding where to spend £3 on a cup of coffee. It would be different if you were deciding where to spend £15k on financial advice.

dunstonh

We have been with SJP for almost 20 years. Over that period of time we have had 3 advisors. The first one sadly passed away. The second retired and the 3rd one has been advising our family investments and trusts for 12 years. 
And I can honestly say hand on heart they have been absolutely fantastic. 

I have done a number of transfers away from SJP as they are so easy to justify.   Usually the effect of the difference in charges until the selected scheme age runs in the high tens of thousands of pounds or into hundreds of thousands of pounds.   When you are charging that much more, they better be fantastic.     But with the tens to hundreds of thousands of pounds extra you will pay them over the decades, are you really getting value? 

You have to ask yourself the question, why are SJP the market leaders in the financial sector. 

That is easy to answer.    The advice industry is mostly made up of small firms of 1-5 advisers.    So, the alternatives are all very tiny players.  SJP has been buying up the clients of retiring advisers or offering big incentives to get small adviser firms to move to them.  That creates growth.     The high charges create the high profit.
So, they are a market leader in size.    They are not seen as market leader in innovation (they use old fashioned product structures).   They are a market leader in high costs.
SJP are also very good at brainwashing their clients and staff.   Its cult like.   The old salesforces of a number of companies used to be like that.  So, its no surprise to see one of the last salesforces act like a salesforce.

Your very defensive post suggests you are one of the brainwashed.