<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
	<title>Financial Standard Comments - FPA proposes risk commission cap</title>
	<description>Australia's main financial planning associations have revealed their views on the risk advice remuneration models that the industry should adopt following the release of the Trowbridge report.</description>
	<link>https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=49573179</link>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 19:38:37 +1000</lastBuildDate>
	<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 19:38:37 +1000</pubDate>
	<language>en-AU</language>
	<copyright>Copyright 2026 Financial Standard</copyright>
	<ttl>5</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Comment by Brian Howard (Gainsborough Financial Group)</title>
		<link></link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>If I read this correctly the FPA is saying ongoing commissions (renewals) are not important compared to initial. Please tell me if I&#39;m wrong. If I&#39;m correct in my understanding they have their head in the clouds and no experience as risk advisers looking after clients on a daily basis. This is at least as time consuming as initiation of a policy in many cases. FPA appears to have no clue about risk and what is involved. This fluff they come out with is counterproductive. Appreciate them trying to help but rather they stay out of the way and let the adults involved in proper risk advice get on with it.</p><p><a href="">Reply to article</a></p><p>For original story, <a href="">Click Here.</a></p>
]]></description>
		<dc:creator>Brian Howard (Gainsborough Financial Group)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 19:38:37 +1000</pubDate>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>