This important new feature in the Advisor Products Client Portal is integrated with Redtail Technology’s CRM. So when you input an Activity in Redtail, it shows up automatically in a client’s portal.
With advisory firms under financial pressure because asset values have plunged in the past year, showing each client a list of tasks you’ve completed is a way of building loyalty. In light of the bear market and advisor Ponzi-scheme scandals, it is critical to regularly include this information in client communciations.
Way back on page 72 of the regulatory reform white paper released yesterday by the U.S. Treasury is some pretty big news for financial advisors.
“We propose the following initiatives to empower the SEC to increase fairness for investors,” says the Treasury white paper. “Establish a fiduciary duty for broker-dealers offering investment advice and harmonize the regulation of investment advisers and broker-dealers.”
Entitled, Financial Regulatory Reform: A New Foundation, the white paper makes official the Obama Administration’s intention to put registered reps and advisors at RIAs under the same set of regulatory rules. That’s not a surprise to anyone.
“Retail investors are often confused about the differences between investment advisers and broker-dealers,” according to the white paper. “Meanwhile, the distinction is no longer meaningful between a disinterested investment advisor and a broker who acts as an agent for an investor; the current laws and regulations are based on antiquated distinctions between the two types of financial professionals that date back to the early 20th century. “
What is a surprise is that the Administration is asking to impose a fiduciary obligation on brokers. Of course, only advisors at RIAs are now fiduciaries, and thus obliged always to do what is in a client’s best interest. That is a much higher standard of care for clients than is imposed on registered reps, who must only ensure they are giving advice suitable for their clients.
The Treasury says in the 89-page paper that RIAs and Registered Reps are the same to retail investors. “In the retail context, the legal distinction between the two is no longer meaningful,” says the Treasury white paper. “Retail customers repose the same degree of trust in their brokers as they do in investment advisers, but the legal responsibilities of the intermediaries may not be the same. The SEC should be permitted to align duties for intermediaries across financial products. “
“Standards of care for all broker-dealers when providing investment advice about securities to retail investors should be raised to the fiduciary standard to align the legal framework with investment advisers,” according to the Treasury Department. “In addition, the SEC should be empowered to examine and ban forms of compensation that encourage intermediaries to put investors into products that are profitable to the intermediary, but are not in the investors’ best interest.”
The Administration is calling for new legislation:
• requiring that broker-dealers who provide investment advice about securities to investors have the same fiduciary obligations as registered investment advisers
• providing simple and clear disclosure to investors regarding the scope of the terms of their relationships with investment professionals
• prohibiting certain conflict of interests and sales practices that are contrary to the interests of investors.
When the U.S. economy seemed like it might collapse last October, Advisor Products hosted a webinar for advisors in an effort to help to help them cope.
Attendees were so grateful, we did it the following week.
Pretty soon, it became clear that advisors wanted us to bring them this information regularly. Thus was born the Financial Crisis Webinar Series, which brings advisors leading thinkers from the financial advisory profession every Friday at 4 p.m. EDT
We’ve now hosted 32 webinars , replays are always available, and since January we have offered continuing edcuation credit for Certified Financial Planner® licensees.
Last week, we upgraded our registration platform. As a result, you are now be able to receive continuing education credit when viewing webinar replays.
With the new registration system, you register just once. We’ll drop a “cookie” into your browser—a short line of text—on your computer's hard drive—and you’ll be recognized without registering the next time you return. If you use a different computer, you’ll need to log in again, however. Before this upgrade, you had register your information each time you wanted to view a webinar replay.
The new registration system also allows you to access videos and request more information about our services from the Advisor Products website. Videos explain our client portal system, newsletters, AdvisorVault, and Online Reporting for Advent Axys or PortfolioCenter.
Advisor Products clients will continue to use their existing log-in credentials for accessing the BackOffice for managing your website, email newsletter, and newsletter. That is unaffected by these changes.
It is our privilege to be able to bring you The Financial Crisis Webinar Series. Join us this week to hear Mark Tibergien, CEO of Pershing Advisor Solutions, speak about the link between operational efficiency and human capital.
How would you like to be able to show clients a list of all of the things you’ve done for them lately?
What if you could automatically feed that list of achieved tasks from your CRM system to a secure personal website for each client?
Or how would you like to be able to assign clients tasks from your firm’s CRM system, and feed these To-Dos automatically to each client’s secure personal website?
This is all totally doable right now.
In fact, these are just a couple of the many powerful features in the new Advisor Products integration with Redtail Technology.
Integration between Advisor Products and Redtail extends one of the advisory profession's most powerful customer relationship management (CRM) software applications to a client-facing application.
Redtail’s easy-to-use web-based CRM system helps you manage your internal staff; Advisor Products' secure Client Portal system helps you communicate with clients effectively.
Redtail CRM tracks and organizes all your client activities. Featuring online calendaring as well as task management, Redtail is easy to use and offers a low cost of ownership.
The Advisor Products Client Portal lets you provide each of your clients with a secure financial home page. Information is fed from your firm's applications for performance management, financial planning, and client relationship management. Client Portals also feature a vault and newsletters written by Advisor Products that are personalized to each client’s profile, making a great presentation of all the information clients need from you.
Utilizing eXtensible Markup Language (XML) feeds, data flows automatically from Redtail to Client Portals and vice versa. The XML feeds save you time and money because you don’t need to re-key data from one application to another.
Using the Advisor Products-Redtail integration is simple. In Redtail, which is a web-based CRM, there’s a page where you fill in details about an Activity your firm is performing for a client.
At the bottom of every Activity page is a checkbox to “Share with Advisor Products.” Checking that box automatically sends that activity to your clients' portals.
Whenever your firm completes an activity for a client, you can insert a note about the completed task in the Activity page in Redtail and it will flow automatically into the corresponding client's portal.
Clients, thus, can see all of the work you do on their behalf. That's important since most of the work advisors do is unknown to clients.
The Advisor Products Client Portal system features a “To Do Manager.” The To Do Manager is where all Achieved Tasks are displayed to your clients.
When you click the “Share With Advisor Products” checkbox in Redtail, that activity is displayed in your client’s secure personal portal as an “Achieved Task.”
In addition to showing clients all of the work your firm does for them, you can also assign clients tasks in Redtail that will automatically be fed for display in To Do Manager.
From the Activity page in Redtail, just pull down the Category menu and choose “Portal Client To-Do.”
That Activity in Redtail, as well as any updates to it, will be fed into the client’s portal.
The integration of these two applications means nothing falls through the cracks with clients anymore.
The integration of Advisor Products with Redtail also makes it easy to provision new client portals, as the demographic information from Redtail can be automatically fed into the Client Portal Platform.
Why do some advisors annually get fired by 10% of their clients or more while other advisors consistently lose just 2% or 3%?
With the impact of the financial crisis hitting advisory firms and clients alike, the answer to this question is critical and may not be that complex.
Clients fire you because they feel disconnected from you and your firm. They leave when you lose credibility, when you fail to touch them in meaningful ways, when you fail to confront their crucial financial issues with them.
Clients don’t fire you because of investment performance. They fire you because they feel you let them down and do not provide enough value.
When a client fires you, it’s not just you who loses. They, too, often lose. Clients that fire you may hire an advisor who is not as devoted or competent. Or they may try to manage their money on their own, which may lead to failure. When a client fires you, it’s often not just you who has failed. They also fail.
What can you do about it? How can you stem your attrition rate and help more people by giving them good financial advice?
The answer doesn’t lie in a new financial product; we have enough products. The answer is not in a new market-timing strategy; we all know diversification is the wise course because no one can predict the future.
The answer is in your communication with clients. It’s in your ability to draw people out, to make it safe for them to share with you their greatest fears, and your desire to actively listen and then meet their demons head-on with reason and intelligent solutions. The way to retain clients is to be deeply engaged in ongoing financial conversation with them about their greatest fears and dreams.
So I asked one of the world’s foremost experts on crucial conversations for help—the authors of The New York Times bestseller, Crucial Conversations: Tools For Talking When The Stakes Are High. To my amazement, the authors were intrigued and have designed a way for financial advisors to better understand how to conduct crucial financial conversations with clients.
Published in 2002, Crucial Conversations, has influenced millions of business leaders. “This is a breakthrough book,” said Stephen R. Covey, author, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. “I found myself being deeply influenced, motivated, and even inspired.”
The authors of Crucial Conversations, Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, and Al Switzler, established a consulting firm, VitalSmarts, which has developed dozens of corporate training programs for dozens of Fortune 500 companies.
David Maxfield, a respected academic, was named head of research at VitalSmarts. Maxfield has taught at Stanford University and the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. He is the recipient of Motorola University’s Distinguished Teaching Award and Stanford University’s Dean’s Award for Innovative Industrial Education. Maxfield is also the author of the 2007, Influencer: The Power To Change Anything.
Maxfield has been working with me to research how well financial advisors handle crucial conversations with clients. On July 10, at what promises to be a special session, Maxfield will lead a presentation at The Financial Crisis Webinar Series in which he will teach advisors the basic skills needed to conduct crucial conversations with clients. You can reserve a place at this free webinar now by taking a 10-minute survey designed to measure financial advisors’ ability to conduct crucial conversations with clients.
The full impact of the financial crisis has not yet been felt by advisors. Investors have been paralyzed by fear. Many advisors are likely to be fired in coming months as the shock of the crisis subsides. Please take the survey and join us as we all heal the wounds of the meltdown and try to learn from it.
At a recent webinar I conducted, I briefly showed attendess a program I use for password management. An advisor today emailed me a question asking me about that program.
Incidentally, if you have questions for me, please post them as comments on my blog. Don't email them to me. A lot of other advisors who read the blog regularly can probably benefit by seeing your question or may be able to answer it. I'm trying to create a community here and would genuinely appreciate your help by posting your comments and questions. About 1,000 unique visitors come to my blog every day and it would be great if you were all more visible and kept me in line.I've seen a nice increase in the last week or two in comments and appreciate that.
Dan Skiles, the face of advisor technology to 5,500 RIAs clearing through Schwab Institutional, resigned his post several weeks ago and started a new job today at Shareholders Service Group (SSG).
Why did the affable 38-year-old executive leave Schwab, by far the largest custodian serving independent advisors, for SSG, one of the smallest custodians? Partly, Skiles says, because SSG offered him a partnership stake and partly because SSG reunites him with former colleagues from his pre-Schwab days, but mostly because he wanted to see his two children more.
In March, when Skiles’ seven-year-old son, Luke, set the table for dinner for his wife and six-year-old daughter but set no place at the table for his father, who he assumed was travelling on business, Skiles says he decided his life was out of order.
“SSG is an opportunity to feel challenged and passionate about my work, which I was at Schwab, but also to still make it home for dinner every night,” says Skiles. “My dad went to Vietnam and was away from my brother for an extended period. He didn’t have a choice, but I do.”
Skiles is an expert on practice management and his role at Schwab landed him at the center of crucial advisor technology issues.
As vice president of Schwab Institutional advisor technology solutions, Skiles was responsible for running a department with 10 technology consultants who are stationed all over the country and charged with giving advisors free advice about implementing portfolio management software and other key systems. In addition, Skiles also oversaw Schwab Performance Technologies, a Schwab subsidiary that owns and distributes PortfolioCenter, a leading portfolio reporting software used by 3,400 RIAs.
A San Diego native, Skiles graduated from San Diego State University in 1993 with a bachelor's degree in recreation management and opened a rock climbing gym with several roommates. He worked in that business for only a few months before being introduced to Robert Reed, a senior executive at discount brokerage Jack White & Co., in 1994. At their first meeting, Reed, who was the No. 2 executive at White, asked Skiles to come back later that same day to meet Peter Mangan, who ran White’s mutual fund supermarket and fledgling RIA business. Mangan hired Skiles on the spot. (The rock clmbing business was sold within a couple of years sold but remains a successful company.)
Internet discount brokers like White grew wildly in the mid-1990s and Skiles handled everything from working on the phones with retail clients to manning the trading desk and helping define technology for advisors. In 1998, when TD Waterhouse purchased White, Skiles was tapped to explain the merged firm’s technology solutions to advisors, and he was instrumental in the design and implementation of VEO, a web-based interface for advisors to Waterhouse’s brokerage platform.
In September 2001, I invited Skiles to participate in a panel I was moderating at the FPA Retreat featuring technology chiefs from all three major custodians—Fidelity, Schwab, and Waterhouse. I invited all three executive to lunch, where Skiles met Rich Freyberg, who then headed advisor technology at Schwab. Freyberg told me after that meeting that Skiles was a “Boy Scout” (referring, presumably, to Skiles’ integrity and not his boyish, clean-cut looks). Several months later, Skiles went to work at Schwab Institutional.
Skiles had a tough job at Schwab because the giant brokerage competes with advisors for retail business and makes portfolio accounting software, a critical system in advisor businesses. Many RIAs for years were uneasy about allowing Schwab to provide their core technology system and custody services, a tension that came to a head in 2001 after Schwab announced it would stop selling its CenterPiece PMS system to advisors that did not use Schwab as a custodian. As Skiles rose in Schwab’s ranks and gained influence over decisions about the company's advisor technology, he was able to avoid hitting such hot-button issues, and relations between Schwab and its RIAs have in recent years been less controversial.
Working at SSG reunites Skiles with Reed, an executive VP and chief compliance officer at SSG as well as with Mangan, SSG’s CEO and majority owner. As I wrote in a recent post, SSG is now a custodian to about 500 RIA firms and it is experiencing a boom amid the economic bust. While the $2 billion amount of assets SSG custodies for RIAs is dwarfed by the big-name custodians—Fidelity, Pershing, Schwab, and TD Ameritrade—SSG has built a profitable business around smaller RIAs that the larger custodians don’t value as much.
According to Mangan, SSG is making inroads with established RIAs with an average of about $30 million of assets under management and who run portfolios of funds, ETFs, and stocks. It’s also gaining traction, he says, with advisors leaving regional and wirehouse brokerages who typically bring no assets initially but garner an average of $15 million in assets from clients within a year of transitioning to SSG. While SSG uses Pershing to clear, and Pershing has its own RIA custody business, Mangan says SSG has differentiated itself by providing diligent service to its advisors and putting together a unique technology platform.
Skiles, who is the 13th employee on the SSG staff, will work on improving internal technology systems used by SSG to service advisors and to help build a technology platform used by its RIA clients. With the broad but undefined title of executive vice president, Skiles' likable personality and natural skills in marketing, communication, and sales as well as his knowledge of advisor technology is likely to help SSG gain a higher profile with advisors even as it is dwarfed by Fidelity, Pershing, Schwab, TD Ameritrade.
Investment advisors who have reflexively blasted SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro for saying the government should further regulate RIAs ought to look upon the civil fraud complaint filed against former NAPFA President James Putman as a cautionary tale.
I’m no big fan of FINRA. The Self-Regulatory Organization’s rules often get in the way of communicating with clients and running an honest advisory business. But the SEC’s allegations against Putman are so terribly damning.
Inarguably, additional rules are needed to better protect investors from unscrupulous RIAs. Far less clear, however, is whether being regulated by FINRA would have prevented the fraud Putman is accused of carrying out.
While the case against Putman is but one of a string of SEC enforcement actions targeting RIAs in recent weeks, it’s notable because Putman was a prominent member of the fee-only advisor community and at the moment this once-priestly segment of the advisor world benefits by confronting some ugly realities about the erosion of fidelity within its ranks. With RIAs vociferously protesting SEC Commissioner Schapiro’s stated intention to “harmonize” rules faced by RIAs with those faced by securities salespeople, reps of RIA may be more mindful that something must be done to protect the public’s trust in investment professionals if they understand the facts of the case against Putman.
In reading my summary of the facts stated in the 30-page, nine count SEC civil complaint filed against Putman, his RIA, and his former president and chief investment officer, please think about whether FINRA regulation would have better protected his clients. Leave a comment with your thoughts.
Putman, 57, started Wealth Management LLC, an Appleton, Wis. RIA, in 1985. He served as president of NAPFA in 1996 and 1997. Putman reportedly has not been active in NAPFA in recent years. However, as recently as September 2006, he participated as a panelist at a “NAPFA Cutting Edge Conference,” speaking at a session entitled, “The Search for the (NEW) Investment Paradigm.”
Putman is charged by the SEC with a litany of securities law violations, along with Simone Fevola, 49, who was president and CIO of Wealth Management (WM) from September 2002 to October 2008. The wrongdoing allegedly surrounds six unregistered private limited partnerships created in 2003 by Putman, which significantly changed his firm’s business model. In one of several similarities withthe Madoff fraud, WM took custody of client assets in the pools.
The pooled investments were structured like hedge funds and, as private vehicles, were unburdened by the need to register publicly. Each of the six funds had a specific objective, according to Part II of Wealth Management’s (WM’s) Form ADV ranging on the risk spectrum from capital appreciation to income producing. None was described as speculative. They were to invest in other private funds, funds of funds, debt, real estate partnerships and trusts, and asset-based loans.
As is often the case, the funds wese given an assortment of cryptic names, such as Gryphon, Quetzal, Pantera, and Watch Stone. Putman, who had discretion to invest on behalf of his clients, invested about 47% of his firm’s clients in Watch Stone and 40% of them in Gryphon.
According to the SEC complaint, offering documents for Watch Stone and Gryphon, the two largest of Putman’s pools, say their investment objective would be “to achieve a high level of income consistent with the preservation of capital” and the pools would primarily invest in “investment grade debt securities.” However, Putman and Fevola invested in “risky illiquid alternative investments,” the SEC says. It gets much worse.
An April 14, 2009 Form ADV filing by the federally regulated RIA claimed investments in the six pools were worth $102 million and that WM had another $29 million in separately managed accounts. The SEC says nearly 90% of the $102 million in client funds was invested in two of the partnerships, Watch Stone and Gryphon, which respectively had $50 million and $38 million. The SEC says now that the six WM funds “appear to have limited remaining assets.”
The SEC says Putman loaded up Watch Stone and Gryphons with investments in a life-insurance premium financing partnership that was managed by Joseph Aaron. Aaron in 1996 had been the subject of an SEC enforcement action alleging that Aron had committed fraud in selling promissory notes to investors. Moreover, the SEC says, Putman and Fevola knew about Aaron’s disciplinary history by 2004 but they still failed to verify that valuations Aaron placed on his funds were accurate.
Not only did Putman and Fevola fail to disclose Aaron’s shady past to WM’s clients, but the SEC says they also each accepted “undisclosed kickbacks” from him of $1.24 million in 2006.
Thus, even if you believe that Putman and Fevola were victims duped by Aaron, the SEC allegations paint a picture of Putman and Fevola falling in deeper with Aaron instead of blowing the whistle on him and admitting their mistakes to WM’s clients.
Meanwhile, in addition to the disastrous investments in Aaron’s life insurance investment scheme, other investments made by Stone Watch and Gryphon also went bad. Three of Stone Watch and Gryphon’s largest investments beyond Aaron’s partnerships are now in bankruptcy. Two are real estate funds, managed by California-based MKA Advisors, that went bankrupt in April 2009 and another investment is in fund called Sagecrest, a Connecticut partnership investing in asset backed loans that went bankrupt in the summer of 2008. While Putman in December 2008 wrote off 50% of the value of Sagecrest, the SEC says Putman has continued to value MKA’s investments at pre-bankruptcy levels in reports to clients.
The SEC alleges Putman had never fully disclosed the risks of the underlying funds invested in by Stone Watch and Gryphon, saying the funds were investing in investment grade securities when the offering documents for the underlying funds said investments were be risky and speculative, such as oil drilling deals. The SEC complaint cites a 70-year-old retiree with Alzheimer’s disease who had signed an investment policy statement targeting a fund with a 95% allocation to fixed income securities.
The Case Now
In the last 10 months, a majority of WM’s staff resigned or was terminated, the SEC says. To a reporter who has read many such SEC complaints over the last 25 years, it seems likely that WM staff, possibly Fevola, is actively cooperating with the SEC investigation and that the SEC is now targeting Putman.
As of December 30, 2008, the SEC says Putman valued Watch Stone at $47 million and Gryphon at $22 million. But according to notes taken by a staffer of the RIA during a recent client meeting, the SEC says, Putman admitted to the client that its investment in one of Aaron’s deals could be worthless.
One investor, whose statement cites an investment worth $1 million, was recently told by Putman that his investment could be worthless. Another investor, with a reported value of $670,000 on his 2008 year-end statement, told SEC investigators that he was recently informed by Putman that his investment could also be worth nothing. The SEC says Putman has continued to collect his 1.25% management fee on the funds based on the allegedly overstated valuations of the assets.
The government says that in February 2008 Putman wrote to clients saying that he was was limiting redemptions to 2% per quarter of the value of each client’s holdings for liquidity reasons. However, the SEC says he has arbitrarily honored full redemption of some investors.
“Absent immediate relief, it is likely WM and Putman will distribute the remaining assets of the WM Funds to a few investors who submitted redemption requests prior to September 3, 2008 and leave remaining investors with little or no recovery.”
What's It Mean?
The SEC complaint against Putman should serve as a cautionary tale to advisors. Those who knew Jim Putman say he was a straight shooter and cannot imagine what could have led him down such a tragic path. It's unlikely that Putman intended to defraud his clients when he started the partnerships in 2003.
A former president of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA) was charged by the U.S. Securities And Exchange Commission yesterday with accepting $1.24 million in kickbacks, dealing a highly embarrassing public relations blow to NAPFA, a champion of consumer rights, advisor integrity, and applying the fiduciary standard to advisors.
The SEC complaint alleges that James Putman, founder, majority owner, and CEO of Wealth Management LLC of Appleton, Wisconsin, accepted $1.24 million in undisclosed payments derived from investments made by the unregistered investment pools. Simone Fevola, the firm's former President and Chief Investment Officer, was charged along with Putman for taking undisclosed payments from the unregistered investment pools.
The SEC also alleges that Wealth Management, Putman and Fevola misrepresented the safety and stability of the two largest investment pools and placed clients into these investments even though they were inconsistent with some clients' objectives.
According the SEC litigation release, the agency filed an emergency civil action in U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Wisconsin to obtain an order to freeze the RIA’s assets.
The SEC alleged Putman and Fevola sold clients the private deals from May 2003 through August 2008. In 2006 and 2007, the SEC says, Putman and Fevola each accepted at least $1.24 million in undisclosed payments derived from certain investments made by the pools.
According to the SEC, Wealth Management claims currently to have approximately $102 million of its clients’ assets invested in the pools. However, the SEC says that the pools have “limited remaining assets and that it appears likely that the reported values of the pools are substantially overstated.” The SEC's complaint alleges that the pools' assets are largely illiquid, and Putman has provided redemptions to investors based on what the agency believes to be overstated valuations.
"As we allege in our complaint, Putman and Fevola put their own financial greed ahead of the safety and stability of their clients' investments," said Merri Jo Gillette, Director of the SEC's Chicago Regional Office. "They abused the trust that their clients placed in them, and emergency enforcement action was necessary to prevent further harm to those clients."
The SEC's complaint charges Putman, Fevola and the RIA with fraud. In addition to seeking emergency relief, the SEC's complaint seeks permanent injunctions barring future violations of the charged provisions of the federal securities laws, disgorgement of the defendants' ill-gotten gains plus pre-judgment interest, and financial penalties.
According to Putman’s biography on his firm’s website, Putman was co-founder and the first President of the Northeast Wisconsin Chapter of the International Association for Financial Planning (IAFP), now the Financial Planning Association. He served on NAPFA’s Board of Directors in 1995 and 1996 before being elected as President of NAPFA and serving his term in 1996 and 1997.
Wealth Management’s website features the cover of Financial Advisor, the trade magazine for which I write, which wrote a story quiting him a year ago. (A previous version of this post incorreclty characterized the FA story as "flattering.") It also features a cover story from Bloomberg Wealth Manager Magazine, entitled “Pooled Assets: Why Some RIAs Are Creating Customized Investment Vehicles,” in which Putman is quoted extensively. The site also features a Worth Magazine (my former employer) cover story from July 2002 in which Putman was selected as one of the “Top 250 Financial Advisors In America,” and the cover from Medical Economics’ November 2006 list of the “Top 150 Best Advisor For Doctors.”
The allegations of wrongdoing against a former NAPFA president could not have come at a worse time for the group, which is part of a troika with FPA and the Certified Financial Planner® Board of Standards lobbying Congress for creation of a new Self Regulatory Organization to oversee financial planners. Last month, another NAPFA member, Matthew Weitzman of AFW Wealth Advisors in New York City, was caught up in scandal and was reportedly the target of an SEC probe, according to a story by New York Times personal finance columnist Ron Lieber, who was one of Weitzman’s clients.
In a post here just yesterday, I mentioned that the continuing string of scandals involving RIAs make it unlikely that any effort to further regulate RIAs could be thwarted by NAPFA, FPA and the CFP Board. But revelations about Putman are particularly sad because he held himself out as a leader of NAPFA, an organization that is dominated by members with great integrity, advisors who have always been at the forefront in campaigning for issues in the interest of consumers. To see NAPFA’s reputation stained by a few bad members is heartbreaking.
For years the "fee-only" brand and NAPFA's brand itself were slowly compromised.The fee-only brand starting about 10 years ago was embraced and then abused by advisors who take hidden sales fees and behave unscrupulously. (NAPFA did try saving it by trademarking the term "fee-only," but was met by harsh criticism and gave up the fight.) Now, however, the NAPFA brand itself has been abused, which will inpsire a new skepticism from the press and cause confusion among consumers.
While NAPFA has remained a beacon of light in the sometimes shrouded world of financial advisors by supporting a fiduciary standard, it also increasingly became a marketing machine for advisors who used the referral network and favorable press garnered by NAPFA to grow their businesses and who were little interested in the high ideals of many the group’s members. Perhaps the news about Putman’s troubles will cause an introspective discussion among NAPFA members and help the group reclaim its high moral ground.
One other good thing that may come of this is that maybe—just maybe—a reporter in the consumer press will write about the idiocy of these “top financial advisor” lists, which sell magazines but stink at figuring out which advisors are really the best. There is no substitute for real research, which these magazine stories always fail to do. While the articles in Worth and Medical Economics were great marketing for Putman’s firm, these publications can’t possibly research all of the nation’s advisors and find the best ones without a massive effort, an undertaking they are unlikely to know how to effecutate or finance.
There ought to be rule prohibiting advisors from using the “top advisor” lists as the centerpiece of their marketing effort when the list is old. Worth has done several new lists since 2002, but Putman’s website does not mention this. It just has the cover from Worth’s 2002 issue on the home page. The same true of the Medical Economics list from 2006 on Putman’s site, which makes no mention of the more recent lists by the magazine, which presumably left out Putman.
Pat Allen's question about my previous post about RIA regulation touches on an important issue. She wrote:
“I've been thinking that the reason Investment Advisors are more communicative on the Web is that they are not regulated by FINRA. Is that right--would you expect that a different advertising standard will be applied? One consequence of which would be that IAs will be discouraged from blogging, tweeting, etc.?”