Canadian Money Forum banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
With fee disclosure letters going out, many advisors will be concerned about clients transferring out to the competition. Some will be able to use fee disclosure and fee base to actually add value to their business...but advisors must know how to solicit objective feedback from their clients to determine what their clients value most from their advisor.

For example, in the last 5 years, you may have had a client with $1 million invested equity mutual funds. That means they are paying about $25,000 a year in fees that they never saw, but will now be notified up front.

What have your experiences been thus far when introducing fee transparency to your clients?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
We hold about $600k with our IA, a full service broker, and we have about $175k in company grsp's, and about $250K in my company stock.

I have provided my IA with an overall statement of my wealth, and a summary of how funds are allocated to different markets to let him build his piece as a part of the big picture.

I am aware of the MER's, and trailers, and unwittingly even got talked into a back end loaded vehicle as part of a swap.

I was the one that did the asking about why not put me in a flat percentage fee based account about 3/4 of a year ago.

About 100K of his accounts is in a non registered one, and that is the one that is getting bigger the fastest since RRSP and TFSA's are full by May every year, and I am an aggresive saver.
If I paid for it raw, then that part of my advisors fees could become deductable.

He countered with a 1.25% annual fee, no trustee fees or trading fees. All funds went to F class that he could and he is selling down the DCS 10% a year until I can dump it all together.
He has a pretty reasonable offering of MF, that are actively managed, do well, and protect capital quite well. So I signed on for fee based, and pay it quarterly selling off things I find ourselves over weight in.


I get pitched complex products that often have a good core idea , but drip with fees. It is usually me that researches the ETF that looks for the upside to the pitched core idea, and then buys that.

Ostensibly now with my and his objectives algned, you would think that ideas like ETF might come up more often from his end.


I am working towards getting set up with a bunch of stable stocks that have reasonable prospects for dividend growth.
I have some US stocks and REIT's I own raw that spin dividends, and see them partially clawed because the stock is held in the non-registered account.
Why the hell is it me that has to tell him to sell F class funds in the RRSP to fund a swap?
Bite the bullet, sell the stock, pay a cap gain if one if due, and put the damn US dividend play in the RRSP with now availbe cash there, where the claw back does not apply.
I fugure there must be some sort of kick back going on somewhere evene with allegedly no trialer fees going to him for him to never suggest to sell a MF unless it is time for his fee cut.


If this is what I, who considers myself to be modestly astute investor has to ***** about a full service brokerage, god save them when a whack of less attuned people get pissed whan they figure what is going on.
They will figure that they are in vehicles with things like 2.7% MER's and it is 4 years until they can sell them penalty free before going fee based even remotely makes sense.

Soon it looks like my disclosure will be that I am dumping them not over fees, but over lack of performance despite the fees.
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top