Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Financial Advice for a Fee

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Financial Advice for a Fee

The following financial adviser firm is willing to give advice for a fee, based on an hourly rate of $100 or $150 per hour. They will also give an estimate in advance for a particular type of advice.
An outline of their approach is stated here:
http://www.tankinlian.com/forms/providend.pdf

I have listed Providend as they agreed to offer their service at a modest rate, and also to provide an estimate in advance. I do not have any financial interest in Providend.

There are a few financial advisory firms willing to offer their service for a fee, but their charges are rather high. If they are willing to operate on my preferred fee structure, I shall list them as well.

Read this:
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/11/end-of-free-financial-advice.html

35 comments:

Anonymous said...: Fee is the most equitable way of remuneration for financial advisers. It is work and advice related and NOT sale. Consumers can benefit more because their needs will be met more efficiently and adequately.
The Financial Service Authority of UK has this objective in mind to ensure consumers get objective advice without the conflict of interest which plagues product selling. It also ensures no miss-selling and misrepresentation and other malpractices that resulted from product pushing currently used by insurance agents and RMs in the banks. The minibond saga is just the tip of the iceberg. Product selling is unethical and only benefits the insurance agents and NOT the consumers.
You can see the fee based advice is low cost yet more competent than commission based.
This will be the soon to be used model to replace the commission which is the root cause of all evils committed by insurance agents and the RMs in the banks.

ProFee Consumer; December 04, 2008 12:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Tan,

Why do you think $100-$150 per hour is more reasonable?

Shouldn't you allow consideration for experience and qualification? It is like saying all doctors must charge $70 per consultation. I'll never pay $70 for a GP but will be willing to pay that for a Specialist.

You shouldn't impose a fee limit. You are not being fair.

BTW, Providend also charge a wrap fee for investment. There is no difference between recuring commissions and wrap fee on investments. A wrap fee is deducted regularly from the client's investment automatically. For a fee-based advice, the client should only pay when he/she meets the adviser for consultation. Automatic deduction in fee is not much difference from the automatic deduction in cash value for a regular premium insurance.; December 04, 2008 8:05 AM
Anonymous said...: More than a year ago, my friend engaged Providend and they charged her about $2500 for a comprehensive financial planning. I think this figure is reasonable as a few firms also charge similarly. The "$100/hour" is mis-leading as it gives the impression that it is cheap. A comprehensive financial planning can be tedious and can easily take 10 to 20 hours of the planner's time. Mr. Tan, perhaps you should let others have a realistic expectation of the total cost - and not so much of the hourly cost.; December 04, 2008 8:09 AM
zhummmeng said...: Consumers of life insurance and investment should use the fee based
financial companies. This is the right approach.
Paying fee for advice doesn't mean you are paying more than buying a product from insurance agents. The truth is you pay LESSER and you get MORE. With insurance agents you pay MORE and you get NOTHING and worse a product that might devastate you financially.
On top of it the advisers are responsible for their advice and ensure reasonable basis in compliance with section 27 of the FAA. With insurance agents you are dumped products which are likely unsuitable for you; you will be financially over burdened and the products don't get you to anywhere in term of protection and saving.
The minibond episode is proof of how damaging product selling can do to you.What you hear today is not every thing. The complaint against insurance agents for miss-selling and misrepresentation is very high. Again this is not the whole truth. There are many people who DO NOT KNOW HOW to complain; DARE NOT to complain; DON'T WANT TO COMPLAIN because the agents are their own siblings , relatives or friends; DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SOLD. If you put all these victims together the number is very very high.
All this happened because of product pushing and commission.
Remove both and enforce section 27 of the FAA you will have a brand new environment where consumers are free from worry because there is protection and redress if they are aggrieved by miss-selling and misrepresentation and other misconducts.
Consumers must push for this change.If an adviser pitches you a product at the start of your encounter you can start running because this is a product peddler who is going to ruin you financially. Take this preventive measure and it certainly serves you well to nip malpractices in the bud from your end.; December 04, 2008 10:10 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: I believe that most ordinary people can have a simple financial planning done within 2 hours. They can read the FAQ in my website and get the financial planner to help them to buy the term insurance, bond and ETF investments.

Those who feel that they can buy the products directly do not need to pay this fee.

Those who wish to pay $2,500 for a complex financial planning can still go to any of the financial planning firms that offer this high end service.; December 04, 2008 11:17 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi 8:05 AM

You have to pay more than $70 for a medical specialist. You probably hae to pay $70 for a consultation that takes 15 minutes.

If you are not willing to pay the consultancy fee, you can still buy insurance from the agents. The commission (included in the premium that you have to pay) can be from $2000 to $5,000 for most typical insurance products.; December 04, 2008 11:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Tan,

Have you actually sat done with a client and do a full needs analysis (option 1)? You will find it will take at least 4 hours and normally there will be follow-up discussion. The mis-selling in the market place is due to the lack of full needs analysis.

For "simple planning" you mentioned, it is likely specific needs advice and product advice. The most evil is the product advice which has caused great mis-selling in the minibonds.; December 04, 2008 11:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Tan,

Will providend entertain a 2 hours consultation (e.g. $300 in total cost)? Can you ask them? Also do they handle high networth clients only or man-in-the-street? Are they willing to help a person of say earning $1500 a month? If they are willing to take in cases with just 2 hours of planning, I think many people will be keen.; December 04, 2008 11:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear TKL,

What do you have to say about "8:05 AM"'s comment on providend charging the "recurring" commission on their investment products? Seems to me that providend is also taking commission too. I did a quick calculation.Let's say the investment is $100,000 and the recurring commission is 1% per annum. Assuming the portfolio return is flat over 20 years, than the total cost is $100,000 x 1% x 20 years = $20,000!! Waolao... I faint..

Mr. Tan, are you really sure you have no vested interest?; December 04, 2008 11:55 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi 11:35 AM

Those who need 4 hours or more can visit the high end financial planners and pay $2,500. You will have this market.

Those who want basic financial planning advice based on term insurance and ETF can take the low cost approach.

They should read a FAQ before they come to the financial planning session.

For most people, they should invest in simple products such as those recommended in my website, www.tankinlian.com./faq

There is no need to invest in exotic and complex products, such as minibonds.

Investing in ETF or other products from SGX does not involve any wrap fee.; December 04, 2008 12:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Fee is usually negotiable and you know upfront what you will be paying. Of course , how much you want to pay depends on the reputation and standing of the adviser, just like the lawyers and doctors. His credentials have indication of his training and experience and the advisory company.
Credentials like CFP, CPA or CFA are globally accredited designations in the financial planning field.
You don't want to see a doctor who has a BSc. in Biology or a lawyer who has a Toastmaster certificate.
Likewise you don't engage an insurance agent who has BSc in English or Engineering but with tikam tikam certificates in insurance,ILPs and expect them to advise you on financial planning.
Like FSA of UK has indicated that it will raise the standard of entry to this profession to university level in order for consumers to get more competent and responsible advice. MAS should follow FSA and raise the standard and the review the remuneration and replace commission by fees.
This will allow people with the right attitude and aptitude to join the industry and prevent people who see life insurance as a get rich quick scheme. Currently there are a lot of tom, dick harry , mary, doris,linda, jane, ah too, ah lian and ah meng and ah kow in the business and "advising' people about insurance. This is a big joke. They are actually in the business to rob the unwary and stupid ignorant consumers to enrich themselves.
MAS should also control the titles the salesmen have. They are more like wolves in sheep's clothing.Titles like Financial consultants with prefix like senior or executive are misleading and misrepresent what they are doing.They are salesmen and women in sheep's clothing and they should be stopped.
If MAS is keen and serious to address the problems like its counterpart in UK is doing, it should start start enforcing the existing laws proactively to send a strong warning that consumers' interest must not be compromised.
Fee charging is the right step to eliminating the evils of commission and clean up the industry of product pushing scumbags who prey on the innocent consumers.; December 04, 2008 1:14 PM
Anonymous said...: For ordinary folks, Mr Tan's free advice on his website is more than sufficient. In my case, I read it and did not buy any of those structured products. Mr Tan simply reinforce what I have also been thinking about such things.

Whether it is $150/hr or $2500 comprehensive financial advice, what is the outcome you expect? Also it is not guaranteed. Hence, do it yourself and play it safe and live within your means.

If you want more money, get a high paying job or do business. Forget about investments that can make you lots of money because it works both ways and most likely the wrong way.; December 04, 2008 1:22 PM
zhummmeng said...: 11.55am ,
did you know there are recurrent charges for products that you buy from insurance agents? Did they give you advice in return or manage your portfolio? Nothing...Under a wrap account or whatever arrangement YOU HAVE TO AGREE FIRST before proceeding to letting the adviser to manage? If you think by paying a 1% the adviser to add value is fair then you sign otherwise you should back out and buy on line and pay 2% for as long as hold(please calculate for 20 years).
The issue here is "do you get back in return for a fee?". "Is the fee justifiable?" "Is it negotiable?"
(If I charge you 20K for next 20 years and return you 300% will you let me manage for you?)
This should form part of the terms of engagement You have a choice. With insurance agents you have NONE and you get NOTHING.

PS. how about paying $10K for retirement planning. The process took 3 months followed by on going review charged separately. It was a complex case and involved big amount.The adviser must ensure reasonable basis on all his recommendations. ...pai tan!!!any slip means the client can take him to court.; December 04, 2008 1:44 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi 1:24 PM

Many people who read my blog stay away from the structured products.

They sent e-mail to ask me, "Mr. Tan, I have this situation. What should I do? How can I buy government bonds? How can I buy ETF? and many similar questions."

I told them, "Sorry, I do not have the time to give individual advice".

Now, I can tell them, "Go to Providend, pay $100 to $150 an hour, keep to 2 hours. It is worth it."

Some people may decide that they can find out the answers for themselves, instead of expecting me to do the work for them.

I wish to build up a network of financial adviser firms, who are willing to provide this type of low cost advice, and willing to observe the ethics to treat customers fairly.

Providend is a start. I hope that other firms will come forward.

Those firms who wish to keep to their current high cost model can continue to do so. You should not attack this model or the firm that is willing to act in this manner.; December 04, 2008 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Wao... Looking at what Mr.Tan says, Provident only charge total cost $300 (2 hours). This is good. M; December 04, 2008 4:45 PM
Unknown said...: "Some people may decide that they can find out the answers for themselves, instead of expecting me to do the work for them."

This single statement is VERY enlightening. Thats all i would say.

"I hope that other firms will come forward.

Those firms who wish to keep to their current high cost model can continue to do so. You should not attack this model or the firm that is willing to act in this manner."

FULLY SUPPORTED.; December 04, 2008 4:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Mr. Tan Kin Lian,

My agent quoted me an AsiaLife endowment which I pay $16,685.70 annually for 15 years. At the end of 20th year, I get a guaranteed maturity benefit of $390,000. I calculated that my absolute return is 55.8%! If I engage Providend and pay $150 in fee (1 hour should be more than enough to fill up forms right?) and if they rebate me the entire distribution cost which according to my benefit illustration the agent gave me which amounts to $9180 cumulative over the years that means that I will only pay 16k-9k= $7k for first year premium right? Like this will be very good. I can get guaranteed return with $9k in savings! I tried calling Providend Eddy but nobody pick up. Maybe business too good? Thanks Mr. Tan for sourcing for us. The brochure you uploaded is informative. You are a great man! I'll let my spouse know that you highly recommends Providend although you have no financial interest.; December 04, 2008 5:31 PM
zhummmeng said...: In mature markets like US, UK and Australia, there are still commission based insurance agents other than fee based advisers.The insurance agents are causing havoc and distress to consumers. This is the reason FSA of UK wants to remove commission and replace it with fee to eliminate conflict of interest and other malpractices like miss-selling and misrepresentation..
Fee based advisory is very misunderstood. It is supposed to ensure that the consumers get proper advice and at lower cost and which commission based cannot.
The fee structure charged by company is not cast in stone, it is negotiable at the outset.
Example: A specific need like college funding for a child can be done in two hours.Let us say the fee is $200 per hour. The commission from the product or products is $1000, either the adviser refunds the fee or the entire commission is returned to the consumer.Whichever option the consumer benefits in term of advice or lower cost. With insurance agents you get nothing but you still pay the
commission(embeded) for the education plan and the plan MAY NOT even be suitable if the agent doesn't know financial planning. From this you can see how advantageous it is to use a fee based adviser.Of course there is the long and short of it. In some cases the adviser may get more and in some less.There is no hard and fast rule. It is between the adviser and the consumer. It is transparent. Everything will be spelled out. With fee based it is money foe value.
MAS must adopt this model if it wants to eliminate conflict of interest and to prevent malpractices; December 04, 2008 6:00 PM
Anonymous said...: this zhummeng seem to be from the industry with vested interest. Your logic not good leh. By your reasonning, all commission salesperson should be banned. Like the sales person who sells TV and Hi-Fi also earns comissions wah. What is the difference between being rip-off by a TV salesman and an insurance agent? Both also the same to me. I think you are from Providend right?; December 04, 2008 6:38 PM
zhummmeng said...: Anonymous 6.38PM,

I am for fee and I think this is the most equitable. Yes , commission can lead to conflict of interest and evils . It is even true in electrical appliance selling but its evil is limited unlike financial products.
Let us take your example of TV salesmen. Yes , the salesman and the dealers can suffer from conflict of interest. The salesmen and dealers will focus on the most profitable(high commission margin)models. Don't beleive me ? Ask for recommendation the salesmen will inevitably recommend you the best model. The best model happens to be the one with highest commission.The shop needs to be incentivised.
Having said that, despite the sales pitch the consumers have safe
guards like he can see, touch feel, smell and on top of it there is a warranty.The consumers can make an INFORMED DECISION and therefor Cavear Emptor can apply. Even suay suay the TV screws up after 1 year the loss is NOT much and it also can be repaired.
But for insurance and financial products,(minibond became minibomb) the damage can be extensive and it only can be found out many years down the road. Worse,99.9% of consumers are blur like sotong and clueless about insurance and investment. THEY CANNOT MAKE INFORMED DECISION . CAVEAT EMPTOR CANNOT APPLY TO THEM. In the hand of saleswolves in sheep's clothing and in all likelihood the consumers will be dumped with a product with high commission like wholelife or endowment product.They are sold like the 'cure all product'. They can meet any need , you name it, it can meet because it earns the agents high commission.Salesmen will lie, cover up and manipulate the customers until he or she buys.
How to avoid them is to get rid of them. Introduce fee and remove commission and ban product selling and install need based. The good advisers can earn decent honest living and high income unlike the insurance agents, the salesmen's earning is ill gotten by miss-selling, misrepresenting, cheating and robbing the consumers.
Anonymous 6.38PM, what I said about consumers is right . You are clueless and ignorant when you made that last statement.If you have insurance and investment I DON'T THINK YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE.
If you are an insurance agent let me give you a piece of advice. Go upgrade yourself and help your clients WITH PROPER ADVICE and STOP ROBBING THEM of their hard
earned money.From what you wrote you got no standard and you will become dinosaur and dumped in the Zoorrassic Park as a extinct exhibit..
Lastly I am NOT from Provident. If you have any disagreement please refute them to benefit the readers.; December 04, 2008 7:37 PM
Anonymous said...: zhummeng,

Since you say fee adviser is the best way, can you recommend an adviser (not a firm but a person) whom is trustworthy? Don't talk so much lah. You must be a fee-based adviser right? Or else why write so much siding for one side? There is so much vested in the industry. I have done much research and have been really disappointed. These are my research outcome:

1. Insurance agents like to sell whole life & ILP because of commissions (known fact, no need to say again);

2. Some advisers tied to certain insurers only got ILP and Term and they say whole life no good. Must practice buy term and invest the rest. Actually it is because their par product was withdrawn years ago when they cannot be the mmet the solvency ratio.

3. Some IFA firms shout so loud saying buy term and invest the rest but when the client says dunno how to invest, the IFA says I will cream you off using the wrap fee. They don't tell the conservative client they just need to buy an endowment with the highest guaranteed return. Actually the IFA firm has a policy that they must rebate all commissions from an insurance policy. So they will not recommend an endowment as they cannot charge wrap fee but still must return the commmission.

4. Others say everybody else no good and therefore must DIY. So that person encourages telemarketting, call center, and internet. Doing this way that company keeps all profit to itself without requiring to share with others. Great for shareholders but vested interest cannot be denied.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO CAN SAY THEY HAVE NO VESTED INTEREST??? Don't tell me, tell frankly to your god do you really have no vested interest?

I have seen enough. Everybody is up to something. It is best to just do what he or she thinks is the best and TRUST NOBODY.; December 04, 2008 9:11 PM
Anonymous said...: 9.11PM,
I agree with you , all that you have written. It is absolutely hard to trust anyone. You even suspect me. I don't blame you.
I have written in the hope that a model will evolve that will eliminate all the conflict of interest and the malpractices. I guess it is hard to eradicate them completely without the help from MAS.
MAS seems to drag its feet and even MAS is not free from conflict of interest.
Below is what i think of these people.
1. Avoid insurance agents. 99.9% don't have your interest at heart.Those who are still around because they are all product pushers, pushing for themselves.They only peddle WLs, regular ILPs and endowment as one size fits.They are all rubbish, con products.Anyone with titles like MDRT, COT or TOT they must be avoided like HIV.They are deadly.Your wealth and protection needs will also suffer from immunity deficiency syndrome too.
2. Don't trust FAs. They can be even worse than tied agents. 77.9% cannot be trusted. Many joined as FAs for wrong reasons.They drool at having more WLs and endowment to push and peddle.For some they see more solutions for their cleints. In addition they have UTs with a string of charges, from wrap to switching to portfolio management fees.With this group nothing is free.They self style as wealth managers but they don't have any idea from A to Z about investment.They charge for their lack of expertise like the insurance agents.
3. The IFAs are similar to the FAs, only difference is the 'I' which stands for 'independent' and it means independent from the rest. They dispense indepedent advice.They have their own set of charges. Again, 55.9% cannot be trusted.
4.Last is the partially truly IFAs but they are only a handful . Their clients are mainly HNWIs.They are beyond the reach of ordinary folks. Their stake is big, win big or lose big. Not our business.
From the various categories if you can get one from group 3 you should be lucky. Remember to go in with eyes open big big; No, not the products but the charges that are negotiable. Settle the charges upfront before moving into the advisory stage so that you have a clear idea of what you are getting.
Remember, nothing is free. If you pay one dollar for 5 dollars return it should be good but not 10 dollars, it is too good to be true.In this way you narrow down and but you have not completely eliminated all the risks of having good adviser.
A good adviser is one who has lot of experience and not many years of same experience like most insurance agents.He or she has globally accredited qualifications, honest and put your interest at heart. Looking for this guy is like looking for a needle in the hay stack. Generally these are the criteria of a acceptable adviser.Remember he must earn a living too . As long you get value for money it should be alright.You can't get this from insurance agents.Treat every adviser as suspect to begin with.; December 05, 2008 12:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan Kin Lian,

We understand the objective of your suggestion/opinion for a time-based financial advisory service. This is to prevent the promotion of a product which has the highest commission which is to the detriment of the client.

However,with time-based service, there comes another possible evil.
That financial advisors purposely drag the time to maximise their earnings.How then will clients know that the advisor is dragging his/her time?

An example, going to a foreign country and taking a taxi. The driver can simply drive the longest route, just so as to max his income.

Just our SGDividends humble opinions.; December 10, 2008 11:45 PM
Anonymous said...: SGDividends,

If you do not trust the adviser, you should never engage him/her regardless it is commission based or fee-based.

If you trust the adviser to look after your interest, it will not matter whether he is commission based or fee-based since he will look after you. However, sometime his compensation from commission based might be too little for so much work and thus it is best to voluntarily compensate him if you think he deserved more.; December 20, 2008 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan,

I disagree that charging $150/hr is modest. It is hardly modest, it's very expensive. Just do the maths.

For a simple advice for 2 hours, the fee-based advisor earns $300. if there are just 2 clients a day (or 4 hours work), that's $600/day's work for 4 hours of his time.

Working a 5 day week (on just 4 hours of work) will earn the guy $12,000/mth minimum. And that's not counting the fund's embedded fees (wrap fees). What happens if he/she works 8 full hours a day?

I remember you saying in the past, $50/hour is modest. Now, you say $150/hour is "modest". Your definition of "modest" seemed to be very wide.

I think such charging is up to the greed of the advisor and because there are no guidelines. Based on your information, I see that such fee-based advisors will earn more than an typical insurance agent and probably more greedy.

I find it difficult to understand why you promote such practices.; December 29, 2008 1:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr. Tan,

To prevent people from thinking that only Provident can do a good job, can I suggest you also post more choices for people to select their advisers?

I would like to recommend you the following advisers:

Adrian Kiat from PIAS (website: http://www.akhiat.blogspot.com/)
Wilfred Ling from Promiseland (website: http://www.wilfredling.com); January 04, 2009 11:00 PM
Anonymous said...: To: "Dec 29, 2008 1:16am",

For a simple advice for 2 hours, the fee-based advisor earns $300. if there are just 2 clients a day (or 4 hours work), that's $600/day's work for 4 hours of his time.

It is impossible for such a fee-based adviser to have 2 clients per day. Practically he will likely have 2 clients per week. This is because the demand for fee-based advisers is very low. Thus such a fee-based adviser will likely earn just $150*2*2*4=$2,400 a month assuming 2 hours spent per client. The remaining time which the adviser is not seeing any client will be spent on prospecting, cold calling and marketing. After net of expense(say about 20% of revenue), it is likely the adviser can only earn less than $2000.

If the demand for such fee-based adviser is high, the adviser can charge a lower fee and earn a reasonable income. For example, if he wants to earn $5000 in gross pay and if he really have two clients per day which having 2 hours of consultation, the hourly rate will be 5000/(4*5*2*2)= $62.50 only.

The effect of economy of scale cannot be rule out. Perhaps that's why many existing fee-based advisers charge a trip digit hourly rate due to the lower volumn.; January 04, 2009 11:10 PM
Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...: Thanks Anon 11:00 for putting up a recommendation for me. I'm surprised to see my name here. I have to clarify that I'm not a full fee based adviser like those in Providend. However, I earns a modest income by recommending plans of good value to my clients.

In my opinion, Fee based advisory works best under a company of different professionals or team model like Providend and Ipac. Its because of the emormous amount of knowledge required in Financial Advisory. There are simply too many insurance plans and investment products and its hard to be an expert in everything for a single person to be in.

Eg, I may not be good in shares and I cannot construct a shares portfolio for rmy client. Or there might be more complex issues that other professional knowledge are required.

A true Fee based FA shoule be very knowledgeable. Many of my clients are a lot more knowledgeable than me. I'm probably in the 70th percentile in term of adviser's knowledge. I think I must be at least in the 90th percentile before I can be confident enough to charge a fee like $200-$300/hr.; January 05, 2009 1:18 AM
Khiat Han Hwee Adrian said...: From my experience, as much as 10 hours can be easily taken for 1 client of simple profile.

The first 1-2hours of interaction is probably only the fact-finding and understanding the clients' concerns, needs, etc. Qualitative and Quantitative data are gathered.

The next 1 hour is probably spent teaching client about what insurance and investment are about because they can be totally clueless about them. If they are clueless, its hard to convince them about term insurance and investments.

Next, Singaporeans generally have many existing insurance and investment plans. Time are needed to analyse them and reconstruct the whole portfolio. Some of our clients simply passed a whole bag of insurance for your analysis and a whole stack of investment statements for your advice. We need an average of 2-3 hours for such cases.

After working out the problem, we need time to analyse the best solution. Comparison of lowest cost plan. Constructing an investment portfolio based on clients' investment profile, etc. Another 2 hours are probably taken depending on complexity of solution.

After working out the solution, another 1-2 hours are needed to present problem and to justify why the solution is chosen. Moreover, there are no guarantee that the client's will accept the solution and demand more analysis which probably take another 1-2 hours.

A patient do not argue with their doctor with the drugs prescribed but a financial planning client will because they may have some knowledge and will simply argue with you.

After clients take up the solution, 1 hour are probably needed to fill the forms and another hour of administrative work are needed to submit according to compliance standards and for future record purpose.

Its not easy to complete a proper Financial Planning case within 1-2 hours unless its a product advise solution and the client is a knowledgeable one who did his own research.

For this type of work, a fee based financial planning firm are more likely target the higher end market who are willing to pay thousands.; January 05, 2009 1:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Adrian,

As long as there is service rendered, you should always charge your client a fee. To test whether any service was rendered - you ask yourself whether has your client benefited from your work such as insurance policy analysis and educating your client. If the answer is YES, that means service was rendered.

Actually you do charge your client a fee and this is through commissions. However, this is not a fair method of renumeration because it is conditional upon the client buying something from you. In the event which they do not wish to buy anything from you (or your recommendations do not require purchase of any product), you will find yourself not paid.

Of course you'll always hope that someone else will pay you if they need to buy something from you. However, this is similar to expecting some kind of cross-subsidy from those who paid to also pay for those who did not.

It is not true that you need to be "90th percentitle" to charge fee. The test is always this - did your client benefit from your advice? If yes, service is rendered.

Unless you take care of yourself by ensuring you are fairly renumerated, how can you expect clients to be taken care by you on a long term basis?

Finally you need to be in a firm that provide a service for fee-based financial planning and has written policy with regard to who can charge fee, a financial planning supervisor and payments processing. You cannot expect your clients to pay you directly. The professional thing to do is for clients to pay the firm and the firm pays you after netting off expenses. Does PIAS have such an arrangement? I doubt so. The last time I heard, they give "free" financial planning but ends up selling the Vista plan.; January 05, 2009 8:34 AM
llch01 said...: I engaged them in 2011 and they charged me $4000 consultation. After putting in a 6 figure sum in one of their investment product, the profit was never more than 0.8%. Even fixed deposit will get you a better return. Until today the return is never better than fixed deposit and the market had many ups and downs within this period. They also charged an annual fee of $300. I think I did better than them in my own investment and I am not even a graduate and they are professionals. so think twice before you engage them; March 27, 2017 3:12 PM
Poonam said...: Nice Post. Thanks for sharing such a nice information. we are
Financial advisors in India and
Setting up a company in India; February 11, 2019 7:09 PM
dibnyt joi said...: Beacon Financial Education is an organization that specializes in providing financial education all around the globe.Financial Education; August 08, 2019 1:32 PM
Value Financial Group said...: Amazing post.Thank you very much for this important post.
As the best Financial Advisory Services in Australia, we provide the help you to make a strategic plan for a safe and profitable investment. Visit us today to know how we can help!; October 12, 2019 2:10 PM
Save Invest Grow said...: Thank you very much for this amazing page and all the info you have shared! It has been totally useful for us and cleared a lot of doubts.
Best Financial Advisors near Me; February 20, 2020 2:23 PM

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Financial Advice for a Fee

35 comments:

Blog Archive