Banking, super and the Murray Inquiry
In this interview with Ticky Fullerton on ABC’s The Business on 15 July 2014, Roger Montgomery takes a look at the banking sector in light of the recent Murray inquiry, and what this means for superannuation. Watch here.
Roger Montgomery is the Founder and Chairman of Montgomery Investment Management. Roger has over three decades of experience in funds management and related activities, including equities analysis, equity and derivatives strategy, trading and stockbroking. Prior to establishing Montgomery, Roger held positions at Ord Minnett Jardine Fleming, BT (Australia) Limited and Merrill Lynch.
This post was contributed by a representative of Montgomery Investment Management Pty Limited (AFSL No. 354564). The principal purpose of this post is to provide factual information and not provide financial product advice. Additionally, the information provided is not intended to provide any recommendation or opinion about any financial product. Any commentary and statements of opinion however may contain general advice only that is prepared without taking into account your personal objectives, financial circumstances or needs. Because of this, before acting on any of the information provided, you should always consider its appropriateness in light of your personal objectives, financial circumstances and needs and should consider seeking independent advice from a financial advisor if necessary before making any decisions. This post specifically excludes personal advice.
Nicholas Christian
:
“If you take an asset based fee – You shouldn’t be called an adviser” Roger, what if you are a ‘Specialist’ Investment Adviser whom over the longer term (ten years) has outperformed for his clients so called “benchmarks” by in most cases 7.5%?
It has been noted by Chant West research that over a recent ten year period “Industry” funds have outperformed so called “Retail” funds by 1% per year. 0.5% due to differences in asset allocation and 0.5% due to fees or the now old ‘trail’ paid to so called “adviser’s” If I charge my clients said 0.5% and over this period through dynamic and strategic asset allocation and careful valuation of selected superior business’ (namely Shares) and coupled with strategic financial planning and my clients achieve 7.5% or more over a ten year period. I can now not call myself an Adviser.
I understand maybe where you are coming from to a degree if you are talking about advisers that simply ‘place’ investments unqualified and this is posted as discussion. But be aware there are “adviser’s” that do specialise so let’s compare apples with apples and not compare-the-pair. Cheers Guys. Keep up the good work.