Financial Standard Comments - Sign on fees creating dealer group controversy Selected sign on payments create a culture of haves and have-nots, according to Count chief David Lane, responding to rumours of fees in excess of $500,000 being paid to some adviser practices by other dealer groups. https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=12930224 Thu, 24 May 2012 13:27:35 +1000 Thu, 24 May 2012 13:27:35 +1000 en-AU Copyright 2026 Financial Standard 5 Comment by Brett Walker (SMART Compliance) () If my business joins a vertically integrated AFSL product house in exchange for a sign-on fee I am richer of course but in due course my clients may come to question my independence. Consumers are not all dills and in the washup will leave anyone who does not provide them with services that meet their expectations. It may be that some clients will find the compromise acceptable but some will not. The opportunity for anyone NOT looking for or getting offered a juicy sign-on fee is to make that a strength when they market themselves to their target audience.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Brett Walker (SMART Compliance) () Thu, 24 May 2012 13:27:35 +1000 Comment by Barry Barber () Nothing has changed in the last 30 years. Financial Planners are still being wooed by product manufacturers/dealers with inducements in one form or another to switch camps.
Added to that there is of course then the "push" to promote the parent companies product.
Is the consumer getting better non biased advice now that we have more consumer driven legislation?
In some cases yes because they have better protection but in a lot of cases no because of the above.
If the industry continues to use product driven incentives then we will end up with more legislation that will continue to drive up the cost to the consumer.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Barry Barber () Thu, 24 May 2012 14:13:25 +1000 Comment by Money Maven () And here is something that did not get any publicity....At a time when our industry is supposed to be cleaning itself up a platform provider pays an amount of around $400,000 to keep a book of business in a recent tender. Surely this is not a payment to assist with transition when no transition is taking place? Conflicted remuneration? Yes! Land grab? You bet! Disgusting? Absolutely!!

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Money Maven () Thu, 24 May 2012 14:25:27 +1000 Comment by Bewildered () What does 'buy the financial planner' mean? Surely we are dealing with people who can't be bought or sold?

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Bewildered () Thu, 24 May 2012 15:03:27 +1000