I am the fund manager
Personally, I would never use the products of a bank on a financial planning basis. This is purely another (would you like coke and fries with that sir/madam) to their franchise arm. As indicated by others, the conflicts of interest are obvious.
I also wouldn't insure my IP's using the insurer of the bank I have loans with (regardless of purported discount) as they are then too quickly informed of adverse event that may affect the income generating capacity of the mortgaged asset and lead to all sorts of further inquisitions and reviews.
Nor would I purchase something like income protection insurance or disability insurance with the bank holding mortgages. They are all too hastily notified of any deleterious situation in your health and earning capacity and if your LVR's or current servicibility are at extremes, well they may see to it that your portfolio might need to be reviewed and trimmed..............all in your own interests of course.
Do I use a financial planner?
Yes. Sparingly. Like seasonisng and condiments, a little goes a long way and more is not better.
1. My Fin Planner has been useful for initial setting up of SMSF and the requisite deed over a decade ago. Now it all comes down to any variations required between my accounant and my solicitor who understand the path I am on and what my risk appetite is.
2. They have been useful for placing me into a decent income protection product.
3. They have been useful in life insurance structure and the setting up of those policies for myself and my wife.
4. I have never (and never will) use them for managed funds, share wrap accounts or any other "coke and fries" type products. I am responsible for my life of financial affairs and for my results.
I do agree they have a role to play in strategy for complex structures (in association with an individual's accountant and lawyer as relevant) and at least the initial set up of SMSF deed and setting up the trustee's responsibilities.
I cannot see the need for a Fin Planner to undertake the yearly Investment Strategy for my SMSF. My wife and I as directors of the corporate trustee sit down and have a cup of tea and minute our meeting and create our new (amended) strategy for the year based upon our age and objectives of our fund.
On the salesman front, there will be (many) who either have no time, are lazy, prefer to have someone to blame, and are not willing to be responsible for their fiscal prowess that will provide a steady stream of custom to (bank and independent) Financial Planning franchises. Regardless of product performance the income whilst one sleeps must appeal to these business models.
Fee for service is one step in the right direction however that also may be tainted with discounting for volume of trade with who knows what other type reward/options/incentives and the like. I'm not saying it happens to anyone here however when they can package toxic debt and give it triple A ratings and the like and suck in our local councils amongst other institutions, then what's to say that managed fund orders over the quota for the month don't get repaid by "in kind stock" over and above the fee for service/advice charged. Not a cynic, just a sceptic.
So, FP's have their role, and the more independent the better. I would also like to have the type of relationship where the FP is able to disclose where they invest and what their track record has been with their own portfolio. Like my accountant(s) and legal personnel, I need to be comfortable with the person and that they have some runs on the board or a heading in the direction that resonates with me.
I would never use them in the traditional salesman role, although there will not be a shortage of people that do.
I am my own asset and fund manager.
Personally, I would never use the products of a bank on a financial planning basis. This is purely another (would you like coke and fries with that sir/madam) to their franchise arm. As indicated by others, the conflicts of interest are obvious.
I also wouldn't insure my IP's using the insurer of the bank I have loans with (regardless of purported discount) as they are then too quickly informed of adverse event that may affect the income generating capacity of the mortgaged asset and lead to all sorts of further inquisitions and reviews.
Nor would I purchase something like income protection insurance or disability insurance with the bank holding mortgages. They are all too hastily notified of any deleterious situation in your health and earning capacity and if your LVR's or current servicibility are at extremes, well they may see to it that your portfolio might need to be reviewed and trimmed..............all in your own interests of course.
Do I use a financial planner?
Yes. Sparingly. Like seasonisng and condiments, a little goes a long way and more is not better.
1. My Fin Planner has been useful for initial setting up of SMSF and the requisite deed over a decade ago. Now it all comes down to any variations required between my accounant and my solicitor who understand the path I am on and what my risk appetite is.
2. They have been useful for placing me into a decent income protection product.
3. They have been useful in life insurance structure and the setting up of those policies for myself and my wife.
4. I have never (and never will) use them for managed funds, share wrap accounts or any other "coke and fries" type products. I am responsible for my life of financial affairs and for my results.
I do agree they have a role to play in strategy for complex structures (in association with an individual's accountant and lawyer as relevant) and at least the initial set up of SMSF deed and setting up the trustee's responsibilities.
I cannot see the need for a Fin Planner to undertake the yearly Investment Strategy for my SMSF. My wife and I as directors of the corporate trustee sit down and have a cup of tea and minute our meeting and create our new (amended) strategy for the year based upon our age and objectives of our fund.
On the salesman front, there will be (many) who either have no time, are lazy, prefer to have someone to blame, and are not willing to be responsible for their fiscal prowess that will provide a steady stream of custom to (bank and independent) Financial Planning franchises. Regardless of product performance the income whilst one sleeps must appeal to these business models.
Fee for service is one step in the right direction however that also may be tainted with discounting for volume of trade with who knows what other type reward/options/incentives and the like. I'm not saying it happens to anyone here however when they can package toxic debt and give it triple A ratings and the like and suck in our local councils amongst other institutions, then what's to say that managed fund orders over the quota for the month don't get repaid by "in kind stock" over and above the fee for service/advice charged. Not a cynic, just a sceptic.
So, FP's have their role, and the more independent the better. I would also like to have the type of relationship where the FP is able to disclose where they invest and what their track record has been with their own portfolio. Like my accountant(s) and legal personnel, I need to be comfortable with the person and that they have some runs on the board or a heading in the direction that resonates with me.
I would never use them in the traditional salesman role, although there will not be a shortage of people that do.
I am my own asset and fund manager.
