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
ASIC hits back at parliament: 'Simply not realistic'
The financial regulator has hit back at suggestions it isn't doing enough to deal with community complaints.
The risks and opportunities in advice: SIAA
This year's Stockbrokers and Investment Advisers Association (SIAA) Conference will take a deep dive into how major financial advice reforms will impact superannuation funds and how they are preparing to help Australians particularly retirees access advice.
AMP Advice partners with BlackRock and Lonsec
Through the partnership, AMP Advice will introduce a new category of tailored managed portfolio solutions.
Succession planning troubles family offices: J.P. Morgan
Global family offices remain deeply concerned about how to prepare the next generation to inherit a vast fortune as almost 30% do not have a structured approach to help them, a new study from J.P. Morgan reveals.
Products
Featured Profile
Fiona Mann
HEAD OF LISTED EQUITIES AND ESG
BRIGHTER SUPER
BRIGHTER SUPER
Brighter Super head of listed equities and ESG Fiona Mann was shaped by a childhood steeped in military-like discipline and global nomadism. 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.