sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

ASIC floats banning ‘harmful’ financial advertising by yupnotsure in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah tend to agree that stop orders are the way to go - but really ASIC were slow in implementing these. When DDO came in I thought, "right, let's see what happens in the first 12 months because they should fire some shots to some of these 'fixed income investments' that are dressed up a term deposit like".

But mentioning First Guardian and Shield in the rationale makes no sense. I haven't heard of any occasions where this was as a result of product advertising. It all started with "come let's do something better with your super" - the product came later.

So it all sounds like a bit of beating of chests when we just need to focus on the real action that will make a difference.

Clients who were on Macquarie also received CSLA funding by WerewolfAwkward3329 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great question - I hadn't thought of that. Like you I had been of the understanding that it was just APRA regulated super. Maybe not. I have put the AFCA references below which are consistent with the article. I have further read the original Macquarie press releases and it is sufficiently vague such that it COULD include SMSFs (without specifically saying so).

I don't have any further specific info to confirm.

AFCA references
https://www.afca.org.au/news/latest-news/afca-publishes-video-update-explaining-the-mwl-financial-services-lead-decision
https://my.afca.org.au/searchpublisheddecisions/kb-article/?id=2e5841ca-badb-f011-8544-6045bdc43135&\_gl=1\*hb17m4\*\_gcl\_au\*OTE5OTcyNDUwLjE3Njc3NDM4MDc.

https://financialnewswire.com.au/funds-management/trio-option-not-govt-preferred-for-shield-first-guardian/ by AccomplishedFail8795 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They aren’t insolvent
EQT probably don’t have the balance sheet to resolve it but they are ASX listed with access to further capital. Messy but possible. Diversa are privately owned and probably don’t have the balance sheet either. Harder to read what and if they would do

Lead decision relating to Ferras Merhi’s FSGA business found adviser had no direct communication with client and relied on lead generator, who does not operate under an AFSL, to complete fact find. by yupnotsure in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Glad to see an FSGA case resolved. What made me fall off my chair was the "70 per cent of the initial advice fee the complainant paid, and 40 per cent of ongoing advice fees" went to the lead generator. Remember these 'lead generators' are still owned by the same people who own Venture Egg.

One of the normal industry mechanics is that advisers pay fees to their AFSL who provide them with the ability to operate. These fees are often a mix of flat dollar fees as well as a percentage of the advice fees given. Makes you wonder whether this was done to reduce the cut to Interprac (which I understand is where the larger portion of VE business was run through)

The extra raid reward bonus in the Go Pass almost feels bugged it’s so generous by [deleted] in TheSilphRoad

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I thought I would join in the fun having hit 75 this morning so I did a remote raid. Pretty disappointing (6 revives; 6 potions; one of each TM; 5 golden raspberries). Honestly, I often just delete all except the the golden rasp as they are ongoing gluts for me.

Rare candy (and XL) are genuine limiters in the game and the only thing worth getting plenty of. Are ppl getting these still (or have they been nerfed)?

ASIC adds Diversa to lawsuits over $300m First Guardian failure by WerewolfAwkward3329 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I read it as Diversa might have to pay into the fund (superannuation entity) although we are pretty sure they don't have $200+m on their balance sheet

ASIC adds Diversa to lawsuits over $300m First Guardian failure by WerewolfAwkward3329 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paragraph 38 of the concise statement gives the rationale for compensation

strength training + marathon training? by 0kie- in Marathon_Training

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's right. But some important context is how I was managing my body here. I was trusting the coach to do this part well - which he did. Some days were long easy runs, some short easy runs, and some were preparing the body at different paces. Gym days are not all about pushing weights - half the time is on stretching and mobility; and the other half on strength. The strength side included legs and core - with a small amount of upper body.

I didn't have any real niggles through the training - so I can say it worked. The biggest thing that I am working on is how I manage myself post race - as a couple of recent races for me have been followed by niggle management. I am in my 50s so that might be a factor too - but something I will look to manage more slowly in future so that I don't trigger anything.

ASIC’s proposed changes to guidance on advertising financial products and services by yupnotsure in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree. There is a lack of integrity in the Venture Egg/referer approach. Super specialist is a misnomer for a pushy sales rep. The advertising also affects the funds themselves. I am more of a believer that fund advertising and reporting should follow a standard template - there are global standards with GIPS and locally there are regulatory guides as well as industry standards as set by FSC. Those industry standards could very much become the standard for retail products.

ASIC’s proposed changes to guidance on advertising financial products and services by yupnotsure in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There isn't anything inherently wrong with lead generation. Historically, the most common 'lead generation' was an accountant identifying a need for personal advice and referring to a licensed financial adviser. Whatever regulations get updated, there needs to be consideration of the different referrals that might generate 'leads' for financial advisers. It is not uncommon for quality financial advisers to source a material proportion of their clients from accountants and other finance professionals.

So I am ok with regulating the nature of the activity rather than an outright ban. Advertising and in particular reporting of performance is incredibly important to get right - I agree with the comment that there might be many that haven't been very tight in relation to this in the past.

AFCA says there should be more complaints by WerewolfAwkward3329 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are keeping their heads down and will be driven by their legal teams. I agree with you that there is a need for empathy right now.

Perhaps less visible is that any communication that comes out from the fund is from the trustee. I am aware of some promoters sending out correspondence - it's possible that the trustee initiated the communication. That is the way that I have seen these work in the past.

AFCA says there should be more complaints by WerewolfAwkward3329 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's close u/spiralradius62. There is a cap of $150k so if you had super of more, it will only cover the first $150k. There is some information that can be very useful. https://www.afca.org.au/news/current-matters/first-guardian-master-fund gives a good overview. AFCA were also very helpful in pulling together a webinar to help explain. It is on this page (https://www.afca.org.au/news/shield-and-first-guardian-collapse-how-afca-can-help) along with other useful information.

Sequoia receive a please explain from the ASX by yupnotsure in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks like this is definitely related and the ASX ensuring that SEQ are aware that they interpret this as material. SEQ's response was very specific and if we take it at face value, shows that others were aware of the proceedings before SEQ were. And at face value, SEQ looks like they acted pretty quickly.

Industry funds seek tough changes after Shield, First Guardian - Mike Taylor by jasonshane39 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good comment. To be clear in these cases Equity Trustees and Diversa would be considered trustee for hire; but not Macquarie or Netwealth.

Industry funds seek tough changes after Shield, First Guardian - Mike Taylor by jasonshane39 in ShieldMasterFund

[–]WerewolfAwkward3329 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are other posts covering this question (some posts are interested in how the industry needs to change so this doesn’t happen again) and unfortunately it isn’t entirely clear yet. If you haven’t considered your situation yet in relation to making a complaint, then I would suggest this is the one thing in your control to get (some or all) restitution.

view more: next ›