Financial Standard Comments - Advisers at risk over asset-based fees Advisers might need to change the way that they charge asset-based fees, which can create conflicts of interest, said finance consulting group The Fold. https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=24805590 Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:23:22 +1100 Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:23:22 +1100 en-AU Copyright 2026 Financial Standard 5 Comment by frank smith (adviser compliance services) The only good news I got about my investements in the GFC was that my adviser's fees had come down along with the asset values - thank goodness. Now that's what I call in my best interests.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> frank smith (adviser compliance services) Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:23:22 +1100 Comment by Sandy Sandgroper (Sandgroper Advisers) It never ceases to amaze me that some people cannot work out that a set dollar fee will always equate to a percentage of a portfolio, regardless of how you dress it up. Its simple mathematics. Sorry folks, some people need to go back to primary school.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Sandy Sandgroper (Sandgroper Advisers) Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:07:51 +1100 Comment by Bob Smith (from Brisbane) If advisers should not charge as a % of assets then the rest of the funds management industry should not do so either. Our firm divides an ongoing fee between strategy advice (dollar based) and investment / AA advice (% based fee). Our implementation fees are project / time based. For investments, you have to have skin in the game to build a clients portfolio. On the business side, would you rather have your fees increasing over time at CPI, or linked to the markets? I know what is more profitable in the long term.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Bob Smith (from Brisbane) Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:35:26 +1100