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
Colchester launches first two ETFs in Australia
Colchester Global Investors has handed a mandate to Equity Trustees for two new ETFs, making it's first offerings in Australia.
Local advice sector an attractive opportunity for global PE firms
Local experts are observing a growing investment opportunity in Australian advice platforms that may not be as apparent for global investors, but since the sector is currently at its "infancy", many can capitalise on buying low and selling high.
FSC calls for tougher oversight of advice licensees
The Financial Services Council (FSC) has called for a significant overhaul of ASIC's supervisions of financial advice licensees, arguing stronger regulatory oversight is needed to better protect consumers following recent industry failures.
State Street launches first active ETFs in Australia
State Street Investment Management has launched two actively managed exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in an extension of its partnership with Blackstone Credit and Insurance.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Hugh Killen
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
For Hugh Killen, several life lessons came from spending time on pastoral properties stretching across northern New South Wales and South-West Queensland.







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.