Print Post Approved PP255003/00299
Vol.26 No.12 | April 5, 2012 | $6.95 INC GST
The publication for the personal investment professional
www.moneymanagement.com.au
FOFA DEBATE: Page 12 | FIXED INCOME ROUNDTABLE: Page 15
Many FPA members disengaged Satisfaction with the FPA
By Mike Taylor
Table Satisfaction with the FPA Dissatisfied
13%
12%
Do not deal with the FPA enough to comment
Not 28% Member 42%
2
FPA Member 58%
23% Satisfied
Source: Wealth Insights
Do not deal with
22% the FPA enough to comment
THE Financial Planning Association (FPA) appears to be suffering a problem with member engagement, according to new research released by Wealth Insights. The research, the result of surveys and focus groups conducted by Wealth Insights over recent weeks, indicated that while 22 per cent of those surveyed were FPA members and were satisfied with the organisation, an almost equal number of planners who are members do not deal enough with their association to have a view. The Wealth Insights data also revealed that 13 per cent of the
Lingering uncertainty on scaled advice SCALED advice remains an area of considerable uncertainty despite the Future of Financial Advice bills having passed the House of Representatives. That was the bottom line of a Money Management roundtable held in the immediate aftermath of the legislation passing the lower house, involving Financial Planning Association (FPA) chief executive Mark Rantall, Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) chief executive Richard Klipin, Mercer’s JoAnne Bloch, and Premium Wealth Advisers general manager Paul Harding-Davis. Rantall told the roundtable that where scaled advice was concerned there was still considerable uncertainty about how it could be provided under the new best interests test. He said that as a result of matters not being clarified prior to the legislation being debated in the Parliament, it was believed that the Government
would provide greater clarity in an explanatory memorandum. Rantall said that while Treasury officials had indicated they believed the provision of scaled advice would not require a full fact-find on the part of financial planners, the FPA believed it required more comfort on the issue. “We need more comfort than that, and we believe that comfort is going to be housed in the explanatory memorandum,” he said. Rantall said the FPA and the broader industry would need to work with both Treasury and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to ensure appropriate regulatory guidance was received to enable scaled advice to happen. Mercer’s Bloch said, however, that reassurances had been received from both ASIC and Treasury behind the Continued on page 3
planners surveyed who said they were members of the FPA were dissatisfied. The release of the Wealth Insights data on satisfaction levels of the members of FPA follows on from a week during which the organisation was subject to some intense criticism over its handling of negotiations around the Government’s Future of Financial Advice bills – particularly the perceived influence of the Industry Super Network. Wealth Insights invited the planners it surveyed to give their reasons for dissatisfaction with the organisation, with many comments from members referring to the costs involved in maintaining status
under the FPA’s Certified Financial Planner (CFP) designation. A number of respondents suggested they had maintained their FPA membership to ensure they could continue to use the CFP designation. Few of the respondents appeared to entirely recognise that the FPA had changed its member structure, and even amongst those who did recognise the change, a number suggested the organisation was still unduly influenced by the major institutions. Among non-members, the major issue appeared to be a belief that the FPA had not been strong enough in resisting the ISN or the Government’s FOFA changes.
Avoca gathers momentum By Chris Kennedy ALMOST a year after starting up boutique fund manager Avoca Asset Management, former UBS small caps analysts John Campbell and Jeremy Bendeich are starting to significantly build their funds under management (FUM), due mostly to an influx of institutional money. Avoca officially commenced operations on 1 May last year under the Bennelong Funds Management umbrella, with fund inception at 1 July last year. It has grown its FUM from around $10 million at 1 January this year to around $63 million currently, primarily due to interest from institutional investors. As at 28 March Avoca had slightly outperformed its benchmark, returning 1.6 per cent against 1.1 per cent for the S&P ASX Small Ordinaries Index over the same time period. Managing director and portfolio manager John Campbell said Avoca was beginning to build a rapport with larger asset consultants, and the fact they had earned meetings with several institutional investors was a positive sign. The fund has so far been rated three stars by Standard & Poor’s and recommended by Zenith. Attracting a higher rating from the retail ratings houses would be a necessary step in attracting
John Campbell significant retail money and gaining a foothold on platforms, but that would take time, Campbell said. He hoped the fund would attract a further $150 million to $200 million by the end of the year, which should be possible if two or three institutional mandates were awarded in that time. Bennelong chief executive Jarrod Brown said he’d been warmly encouraged by the response so far from the asset consultant community, but a four star or recommended or equivalent rating Continued on page 3