Paul, you have me worried about my super in a not-for-profit fund described by finder.com as a low-fee super fund. The fund is always considered one of the top ones. My total fees are 1.06% across some growth but mainly balanced option.

When I checked the only way to get down to 0.05% you mention above is to have money in the cash option - really not much of an option with rock-bottom interest rates at the moment.

Or are there funds I am not aware of that would give you a balanced option with only 0.05% fees? I might add it is so hard to find exactly what fees you pay, as a PDS is almost impossible to navigate with different tables for a plethora of fees.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

Might be worthwhile seeing an adviser Marg.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

Paul, if I have it correct, you were originally one of those advisers charging yearly fees before finding media fame, then started Ipac which again had financial planners who charged fees, before cashing in by selling it all to one of those big retail institutions, in essence all built on clients trust and fees.

Now years after banking your millions, you're really saying it's all terrible? Wonder if you'd still say that if you hadn't sold?

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

Thanks for you comment, Rob. You are quite correct, along with my partners we started ipac as a fee for service financial advice firm back in 1983, some 39 years ago. I started doing commentary on money issues on radio about the same time and the Money TV show in 1993. Money magazine was launched in 1999, so my decades at ipac combined with my time in the media

I am very proud of ipac. It was arguably the first retail firm charging clients a fee for service and not commission on product sales, which I have argued for nearly 40 years, lead to bias and often poor outcomes for clients. Fee for service makes costs very obvious for we consumers. Hidden fees and commissions are terrible for consumers, whether it was with ipac or any other firm. I just want consumers to understand the fees they are paying and make an informed decision about whether they are getting value or not.

The point I made to Graham was simply what value was he getting from $9000 in advice fees? As I said, "It is important that you do consider exactly what services you are getting. It is all about value for money".

If Graham is coming to regular meetings with his advisor and receiving detailed, ongoing advice about planning their investments today and into the future, along with complete "lifestyle financial planning", which would include discussions about income in retirement, legislative changes, investments outside of super, estate planning and so on, this valuable advice and guidance would be well worth the annual fee.

But, as I said, if it meant the advisor was simply looking at a couple of statements a year from a single super fund, it is very poor value. Graham can look at what value he is getting and make his own informed decision. Put simply, is he getting $9000 a year worth of valuable advice or isn't he?

You are also correct in that we sold ipac to AXA nearly 20 years We started the business as 5 youngish guys, all in our mid to late 20s. Speaking for myself, after a couple of decades growing and running a complex business, as my 50 th birthday approached, it was very obvious to me that a business the size of ipac needed serious institutional backing and capital.

For 40 years I have very publicly pressed for financial services consumers to pay a know fee, not hidden commissions. 40 years ago people laughed at this "preposterous" idea, but now of course it is the norm. When it comes to paying a fee to ipac or any other firm, my position has been consistent. As consumers, when we pay a known fee, each and every one of us should consider the value of the services we receive and the cost of these services.

Fees are a certainty with investment and returns, in particular in the short term, are quite unknown. So if a consumer needs no advice, I will continue to suggest very low cost products, be this super or non super investments. As the Royal Commission demonstrated, many Australians have been paying for advice and not receiving any.

I have always strongly believed that advice can be very valuable. Personally, I pay quite high advice fees, but I receive very comprehensive and specific advice and portfolio monitoring. So if Graham or any other consumer is paying high advice fees and getting excellent advice and service, fantastic. If any of us is paying for nothing, or too little, time to move on.

Paul Clitheroe

Founder

Money magazine

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.