Advisers at risk over asset-based feesBY BEN COLLINS | THURSDAY, 10 JAN 2013 2:55PMAdvisers might need to change the way that they charge asset-based fees, which can create conflicts of interest, said finance consulting group The Fold. |
Editor's Choice
Corporate, governance issues fuel whistleblower tipoffs: ASIC
The corporate regulator received nearly 2000 tip offs from whistleblowers in the last financial year, a whopping 183% jump annually, the majority of which relate to corporate and governance issues.
Platinum awards mandate, changes fund name
Platinum Asset Management has awarded a mandate to a US-based investment manager to oversee investment capabilities in a 20-year-old fund, simultaneously altering the name to reflect the update.
Workplace mental ill-health can cost Australia $27bn: Report
Workplace mental health issues are directly costing the Australian economy $12 billion per annum in lost gross domestic product (GDP), with the cost set to rise by more than 125% over the next 15 years in excess of $27 billion a year.
ASX turns up heat on Clime Capital following KPMG scrutiny
The ASX has also raised concerns over Clime Capital's valuation of its unlisted assets portfolio and the qualified opinion that was eventually handed down by its auditor KPMG.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

David Sharpe
CHAIRMAN
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
A family man, business owner, cricket fanatic and financial adviser, David Sharpe has many facets. One of his biggest legacies, as he steps down as chair of the Financial Advice Association Australia, is leaving the profession stronger than he found it.







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.
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.
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.