Brochure gives basics on advice providers

I thought your March 26 Monday Morning column [“Industry needs a national awareness campaign”] was right on point.

I thought your March 26 Monday Morning column [“Industry needs a national awareness campaign”] was right on point.
While it certainly does not rise to the level of the “got milk?” campaign, a coalition of consumer groups, state regulators and industry groups got together last year to create a brochure. I think the brochure is at least a step in the right direction of giving consumers some basic — and much-needed — information about who they can and should turn to for professional investment assistance.
I was disappointed with the lack of interest/coverage by almost everyone in the media when our coalition released the brochure.
Thanks again for your excellent column.
David G. Tittsworth
Executive director
Investment Adviser Association
Washington

Who says there’s no free-lunch scam?
Charles Paikert’s article on marketing firms that “target” the elderly was right on the money.
Here in eastern Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, we see dozens of “free lunch” seminars offered by insurance salespeople posing as some type of certified senior expert adviser, some with ghost-authored books.
As a matter of fact, I’ve received several pieces of correspondence from marketing companies offering to make me an “instant author” for sums ranging from $2,000 to $5,000.
As a Series 7, Series 24 licensed rep and a certified financial planner (the fiduciary kind), we often get to see the victims of these scams ex post facto.
The sooner the [North American Securities Administrators Association Inc.] or NASD [both of Washington] moves in the same direction that Massachusetts is headed, the better protected our poor, overly trusting seniors will become. I hope they “throw the book” at those two, just to set an example.
Alfred T. Benelli, CFP
The Merlin Group Ltd.
Trooper, Pa.

Some older investors resist a helping hand
I liked your March 19 Monday Morning column. I live in Kansas, and our insurance commission will not do anything for the seniors unless they file a complaint.
I had a client that had an annuity, and another company’s adviser put him in another annuity, and it cost my client $29,000 in redemption fees.
He “trusted” the other adviser and would not believe me about the loss or contact the state. I even sent copies of all the documents to the state, and they would still do nothing.
We must find a way to protect these people. Many seniors, especially those in smaller communities, do not want even to file complaints, because they are afraid of the consequences. What a shame. I have tried to help seniors for more than 10 years now. I have been able to get some problems fixed by getting sons and/or daughters involved to file complaints. I have three law firms that I work with to file civil action if necessary.
Jim Huenergarde
Financial adviser
Hays, Kan.
Waddell & Reed Financial Inc.

Editorial on earnings needs to be rethought
I think if you take a moment and think hard about your March 19 editorial about quarterly earnings announcements, you may choose to back off your position.
Let me make it clear that I agree 100% with your assertion that “more chief executives and chief financial officers should follow the examples of Berkshire Hathaway [Inc. of Omaha, Neb.] and [The] Washington Post [Co.], and announce that they no longer will provide earnings guidance.” I agree with the tone of the editorial that this tradition does way more harm than good.
But the following sentence is really troubling: “If they don’t, the SEC should act.” Think about that. You are giving the government a blanket right to tell corporations how to conduct a critical business function, not to mention the implications on restriction of free speech.
Imagine the furor if someone suggested restricting press speech in that way. Asking the government to intervene would be a disaster, nor could it hold up to a lawsuit, in my opinion.
No, the right answer is to continue the drumbeat to get companies to do this on their own. It is their choice, not ours.
Jay Weinstein
Oak Forest Investment Management Inc.
Bethesda, Md.

Your Silver Bullet unconnected to Advent
As one of the founders and owners of Your Silver Bullet LLC, I am writing to comment on your March 26 article “Advent Software faces competition from consortium.” This article does not correctly describe the purpose of our organization.
First, Your Silver Bullet has nothing to do with Advent Software [Inc. of San Francisco]. We have never even discussed Advent. In fact, we welcome any company, including Advent, that meets our stated objective criteria.
The purpose of Your Silver Bullet is simple and straightforward — to facilitate and improve integration between separate applications. By joining Your Silver Bullet, each member firm is committing itself to the development of better integration. This means sharing ideas and creating standards to make integration between applications faster to develop, more robust and more dependable.
This is not an attempt to create a “single solution,” with one vendor providing each component application. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Member firms include competitors within each application (e.g., CRM Software [Inc.] and RedTail Technology [Inc.] for office management). Our goal is to provide advisers a choice of superior individual applications, all of which work well together.
Again, this has nothing to do with Advent, or any other particular company or software. I believe that this article gives advisers an inaccurate impression of the purpose of Your Silver Bullet, and would appreciate a follow-up clarification. Our intentions are clear and are incorrectly represented in this article.
Greg Friedman
President
Friedman & Associates
Novato, Calif.

Editor’s note: The article states: “Although Mr. Friedman was careful not to mention Advent by name, the effort is a clear attempt to compete with Advent for back-office business, according to financial advisers,” and goes on to quote a number of advisers holding that belief. He is quoted as saying: “Everybody in the industry has been burned by being with a single platform,” and, “It’s basically Microsoft all over again … As an adviser, I don’t want to be in the hands of one company.” For larger registered investment advisers, the dominant single platform is that of Advent.

Corporate advisory units not investing in people
Quotas for selling proprietary products [“Insurers said to steer reps to in-house wares,” March 5] definitely [are] a burr under many planners’ saddles. I worked with Lincoln [Financial Advisors Corp. of Fort Wayne, Ind.] for about three years before moving on.
I originally was told to come on board with Lincoln, because all sources of revenue counted toward benefits and production quotas. In other words, I could sell just mutual funds and reach the quotas or just charge planning fees, etc.
That all changed when Bob Dineen was appointed president and CEO. He took about six months to attend meetings with advisers around the country. Then he started doing things his way. Immediately, planners started heading for the doors. Thousands have left.
The problem with the approach in the industry is that no new people are really getting trained in these corporate firms. The firms are not investing in people. I would be really surprised if Lincoln, specifically, can bring on the planners with any substantial assets.
I notice, too, that articles regarding Lincoln, since [Mr.] Dineen started, have reported several negative aspects of the firm. And I haven’t seen any of the consistent Lincoln ads in InvestmentNews since — recruitment or otherwise. Hmm.
David S. Sanders, CFP
WTB Investment Services
Meridian, Idaho

Smith Barney reps see pay plan as a pay cut
I read with interest your March 5 article about the Smith Barney pay plan — or pay cut, as it is perceived among Smith Barney financial advisers.
My experience is that financial advisers in our office who don’t talk about jumping ship are now actively talking to firms and recruiters. In our office, we find of interest the count of Smith Barney advisers nationally who left the prior week.
I think that upper management is naive to think that Smith Barney’s financial advisers won’t vote with their feet on this one — especially when you factor in the fact that Smith Barney is now the lowest on the street in terms of payout and the least adviser friendly in terms of internal compliance practices.
Michael D. McQuilkin, CFP, CPA
Orange, Calif.
Smith Barney

An object lesson: How not to market
I enjoyed reading your March 26 article on marketing firms targeting the elderly and would like to pass the article out to all of my registered reps. I think that this will help discourage any of them who might be considering this type of marketing. If you have a reprint available, will you be so kind as to e-mail it to me?
I applaud you for “shining the light on these cockroaches.”
James C. Gaul, CFP
Chairman and chief executive
Alternative Wealth Strategies Inc.
Cherry Hill, N.J.