‘Mohels’ & Assets Under
Management ‘Personal Financial Planners’
Know before whom you
stand
Talmud
Assets under
Management (AUM) is an increasing
annuity for my practice and the
monetization metric (for the valuation) and sale of my practice.
Anonymous AUM ‘Fee
Only’ Planner
In the beginning (Genesis), personal financial planning was concerned as
a distribution system for otherwise the sale of product by commissioned (‘fill
or kill’ aka ‘you only eat what you kill’) salespeople in ‘personal financial
planner’ clothing.
Though still commission driven, this so called personal financial
planning distribution system created another variation – fee and commission
(later renamed by some Lanny Davis spin concocter to fee based planning to try
to hide the transaction nature of the compensation making it more objective).
Some ‘so called’ fee and commission planners tried to pitch the objectivity of
their advice by having two separate entities: one to solely give advice – and
the other typically their broker dealer arrangement where they would receive
commissions to give the appearance of a Chinese Wall. (Not Chinese Walls never
stopped an invader).
Fee and commission or the euphemized fee based compensation is akin to
being a little pregnant – and worse by a control brother and sister arrangement
of two ‘independent entities.’
When fee only personal financial planning came on the scene, various
compensation arrangements offered:
- Hourly
- Retainer
- Assets Under Management
(AUM is the predominant mode of compensation of 'fee only planners' (though
some also charge an additional fee)
Don’t sacrifice what
you need for what you don’t need.
Stipulating to
there are difficulties with all the above methods of compensation and therefore
each type requires full and timely disclosure upfront of type and estimated
amounts, ASSets under Management’s (AUM)(2) inherent in
conflict of interest is a dagger at the heart – the very essence of the reason
for personal financial planning – managing goals and their attainment. By its
very nature, AUM, is externally comparative focusing on relative comparisons to
indices rather than the client’s goals (despite assertions otherwise as the planner
is inherently incentivized and thus take higher risk (for ‘more’) than
necessary to meet the personal goals of the client. Two examples:
1.
Seeking assets growth at the expense of lifetime income for the
retiree
2. Unlocking
‘equity from the home’ – increasing the mortgage (leverage) to put into the
market for “higher” returns on investment..
As the 2008
meltdown in housing and the market aside proved, ‘unlocking’ that equity not
only lost money/equity (though there was that higher amount of assets under
management for the planner to be compensated on) but increased the amount of
the goal necessary for lifetime income (versus lowering the need if the
mortgage would be paid off).
AUM, regardless
of conflicted self serving AUM planners writers bloggers apologists’ beta, gamma, alphas – Omaha Omaha hike hike hike
long winded audibles eerily reminded one of the same justifications by the blue
suede shoe fill or kill commission planners and only a little pregnant fee
based ‘planners’ audibles in the 70’s and 80’s. The difference – AUMers are
woofs in fee only personal financial planner clothing woofing down the reduced
rates of returns – and now having the
audacity to be pitching ‘goals based planning.’ The only thing missing is the
Bris and or Baptisms.
Where is the CFP
Board, The CPA Financial Planners (loving their AUM), or sadly NAPFA which I
co-founded (which has become a marketing trade association in professional
organization clothing).?
There is no
personal financial planning Messiah to call upon but maybe Personal Financial
Planning Mohel(3) will come to the fore-skin
of AUM to cut to the chase?
It couldn’t hoit!
.
Know Before Whom You Stand
& Stand Corrected
1.- Notice AUM contains AU – the
periodic symbol for Gold or in this context Planner’s Gold
2- Font and bolding deliberate.
3.- A mohel is a Jewish person
(usually a Rabbi) trained in the practice of the covenantal
circumcision. It is not unusual
for the Mohel to also be a jeweler by trade given he works with The Family JEWels.
PS: Yes, there are conflicts with
hourly and retainer compensation methods but the comparison is akin to making
going 60 mph in a 55 mph zone morally equivalent to 120 mph in the same zone. Hourly
conflict – an invitation to inefficiency as 1 planner’s hour is another
planner’s month. Retainer conflict –if subject to annual review – over
utilization (to the planner’s time detriment) or under utilization (to the
planner’s benefit) can be addressed
Please no ‘you’re make a mountain out of Mohels’ rebuttals.
No comments:
Post a Comment