Federal Court finds S&P guilty in landmark rulingBY MARK SMITH | FRIDAY, 6 JUN 2014 12:05PMA landmark ruling by the Federal Court against ratings agency Standard & Poor's, ABN AMRO and Local Government Financial Services (LGFS) could have implications across the world. Related News |
Editor's Choice
Janus Henderson acquires NBK Wealth, Tabula Investment Management
Janus Henderson has acquired the wealth management arm of the National Bank of Kuwait, NBK Wealth, as well as European ETF provider, Tabula Investment Management.
ART names advice and education leads
Australian Retirement Trust (ART) has revamped its advice, guidance and education team and created two new leadership roles.
Men, women in same occupation drive pay gap
A whopping 80% of the gender pay gap can be attributed to women being paid less than men within the same occupation, a new economic analysis shows.
Macquarie Group profits falls 32% to $3.52bn
Macquarie Group has reported a net profit of $3.52 billion for the year ending 31 March 2024, a 32% decrease from the previous year.
Products
Featured Profile
Robert De Dominicis
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
GBST HOLDINGS LIMITED
GBST HOLDINGS LIMITED
It was during a family sojourn to the seaside town of Pescara, Italy, Rob DeDominicis first laid eyes on what would become the harbinger of his future. Andrew McKean writes.
S&P commented: "to enforce a legal duty against a party like S&P, which has no relationship with investors who use rating opinions, yet impose no responsibility on those investors to conduct their own due diligence."
This says it all about how ratings agencies in general think - they have 'no relationship with investors who use rating opinions'. Why do they think investors use their rating opinion? Because investors and financial planners trust that these organisations which hold themselves out to be holier than thou, say they have the expertise and experience to rate product properly, and have access to far more inside information than any investor or financial planner can ever get their hands on.
So S&P are only in it to take money off product suppliers who use them to confirm their product is clean and good to invest in.
If S&P think this way and don't want to be held to the high standard the ratings profession has set, simple, close up shop and do not offer a ratings service. It is about time ratings agencies where held to account for false and misleading ratings.
Do that and their job is done and the investor and planners can have faith in what they were rating. Knowing that bad products will not be miss rated. That's how the market should work.