[quote=Moraen]max - the people on this forum have been doing this a lot longer than you.



Why do I treat you better than LA Broker? I don’t know.



But seriously, listen to the people here. They know what they are talking about. I’m sorry, but you don’t. You came here for advice. You got it. [/quote]

Are you talking about the cold call Brokers reps and boiler room freaks that post here?
They have nothing to offer anyone.  Sorry Moraen. 

[quote=max]

[quote=anonymous]Do you know what fee-based means.

[quote=max]

I never said a fee based adviser has no incentive to violate his fiduciary obligations.  Just less incentive than a salesman.
[/quote]

Speaking of buying-and-holding, if your primary concern is the best interest of the client, how do you reconcile this:

A commission-based broker invests $100K of his clients money in an American Funds.  Client pays about a $5K commission in the first year.  Then no more for as long as they stay with American Funds.

A fiduciary RIA places the same client’s $100K into a fee-based account at 1% per year.

If the client intends to hold the position for 10 years, which situation is in the best interest of the client?

First of all, the commission is $3500 for 100k in American funds.  Second, it depends on the client and the advisor.  If the advisor is putting the client in SMA’s or something like EDJ’s advisory solutions, the client may get better returns over the time period with the wrap fee.  Third, if you put the client in American funds “C” shares, they would be better off with the upfront “A” share. 

[quote=DHK]

[quote=Morphius]

[quote=DHK]
I’ve got people that tell me everything that goes on on your site. [/quote]
At least he has something going on at his site to tell about.  Yours, on the other hand died a slow whimpering death and nobody even noticed.  Least of all you.
[/quote]


You’re next.
[/quote]
Bobby, Bobby, Bobby … take a breath!   Someone responds to one of your jabs and rather than reply in kind you skip right to personal threats?  What happened to that witty repartee and biting humor you used to have? 

Now you’re even imagining me in other users here.  You should know my ‘voice’ by now, and it doesn’t sound anything like Gordon Ramsey, nor do I use multiple usernames.  That’s your game, not mine Bobby/Hank/Alice/Eddie/DHK.

But regardless, l think we both got punked by Frank Abagnale.  Look again at the way his posts read.  That’s not who we both thought it was.  You called him out to start it off, and he picked up that ball and just ran with it.  Did pretty well too, I’ll admit.  Had me going.  He is obviously someone who has been around long enough to know the basics of the history and banter a bit, but that’s not the way BG writes, and everything ‘Frank’ wrote is known by plenty of people.  Re-read his posts and I think you’ll see it this time, too.  Look at his signatures.  Does that sound like you-know-who?  Whoever it is disappeared before the charade became obvious.  I’m not sure who is is, but I’m convinced it’s not who we both thought.

This all makes me wonder about Max and who he really is.  Has to be a troll.  No one can be that dense.  Is there a full moon this weekend? 

[quote=max]
Are you talking about the cold call Brokers reps and boiler room freaks that post here?
They have nothing to offer anyone.  Sorry Moraen. 
[/quote]
Don’t feed the troll. 

[quote=Morphius]

[quote=DHK]

[quote=Morphius]

[quote=DHK]
I’ve got people that tell me everything that goes on on your site. [/quote]
At least he has something going on at his site to tell about.  Yours, on the other hand died a slow whimpering death and nobody even noticed.  Least of all you.
[/quote]


You’re next.
[/quote]
Bobby, Bobby, Bobby … take a breath!   Someone responds to one of your jabs and rather than reply in kind you skip right to personal threats?  What happened to that witty repartee and biting humor you used to have? 

Now you’re even imagining me in other users here.  You should know my ‘voice’ by now, and it doesn’t sound anything like Gordon Ramsey, nor do I use multiple usernames.  That’s your game, not mine Bobby/Hank/Alice/Eddie/DHK.

But regardless, l think we both got punked by Frank Abagnale.  Look again at the way his posts read.  That’s not who we both thought it was.  You called him out to start it off, and he picked up that ball and just ran with it.  Did pretty well too, I’ll admit.  Had me going.  He is obviously someone who has been around long enough to know the basics of the history and banter a bit, but that’s not the way BG writes, and everything ‘Frank’ wrote is known by plenty of people.  Re-read his posts and I think you’ll see it this time, too.  Look at his signatures.  Does that sound like you-know-who?  Whoever it is disappeared before the charade became obvious.  I’m not sure who is is, but I’m convinced it’s not who we both thought.

This all makes me wonder about Max and who he really is.  Has to be a troll.  No one can be that dense.  Is there a full moon this weekend? 

[/quote]

You’re next. I’ve learned a lot today.

[quote=henryhill]First of all, the commission is $3500 for 100k in American funds.  Second, it depends on the client and the advisor.  If the advisor is putting the client in SMA’s or something like EDJ’s advisory solutions, the client may get better returns over the time period with the wrap fee.  Third, if you put the client in American funds “C” shares, they would be better off with the upfront “A” share. [/quote]

Sorry, should have said that the RIA places the client into the same mutual fund at 1% yearly.

In any case, you made my point.

[quote=DHK]

[quote=Morphius]



[quote=DHK]

[quote=Morphius]

[quote=DHK]

I’ve got people that tell me everything that goes on on your site. [/quote]At least he has something going on at his site to tell about. Yours, on the other hand died a slow whimpering death and nobody even noticed. Least of all you. [/quote]You’re next. [/quote]Bobby, Bobby, Bobby … take a breath! Someone responds to one of your jabs and rather than reply in kind   you skip right to personal threats? What happened to that witty repartee and biting humor you used to have? Now you’re even imagining me in other users here. You should know my ‘voice’ by now, and it doesn’t sound anything like Gordon Ramsey, nor do I use multiple usernames. That’s your game, not mine Bobby/Hank/Alice/Eddie/DHK.But regardless, l think we both got punked by Frank Abagnale. Look again at the way his posts read. That’s not who we both thought it was. You called him out to start it off, and he picked up that ball and just ran with it. Did pretty well too, I’ll admit. Had me going. He is obviously someone who has been around long enough to know the basics of the history and banter a bit, but that’s not the way BG writes, and everything ‘Frank’ wrote is known by plenty of people. Re-read his posts and I think you’ll see it this time, too. Look at his signatures. Does that sound like you-know-who? Whoever it is disappeared before the charade became obvious. I’m not sure who is is, but I’m convinced it’s not who we both thought.This all makes me wonder about Max and who he really is. Has to be a troll. No one can be that dense. Is there a full moon this weekend? [/quote]You’re next. I’ve learned a lot today. [/quote]



Bullsh*t, you’re too stupid to learn.

[quote=etj4588]

[quote=henryhill]First of all, the commission is $3500 for 100k in American funds. Second, it depends on the client and the advisor. If the advisor is putting the client in SMA’s or something like EDJ’s advisory solutions, the client may get better returns over the time period with the wrap fee. Third, if you put the client in American funds “C” shares, they would be better off with the upfront “A” share. [/quote]Sorry, should have said that the RIA places the client into the same mutual fund at 1% yearly.In any case, you made my point.[/quote]



Do American funds have expenses or not?



Why would an RIA put someone in American funds anyway? Makes very little sense to me to use them.



The best reason is, even if this is the case, that client pays $3500 and then five years later, an Oppenheimer wholesaler convinces you that you should use American funds, but “here’s where Oppenhemier can add value”. Commission guy pulls out the switch letter, signs it and charges another 3.75%.



I can’t remember who said it best but, ethical is ethical. Doesn’t matter how you charge.



There is a conflict no matter how you look at it.

[quote=Moraen]


Do American funds have expenses or not?



Why would an RIA put someone in American funds anyway? Makes very little sense to me to use them.



The best reason is, even if this is the case, that client pays $3500 and then five years later, an Oppenheimer wholesaler convinces you that you should use American funds, but “here’s where Oppenhemier can add value”. Commission guy pulls out the switch letter, signs it and charges another 3.75%.



I can’t remember who said it best but, ethical is ethical. Doesn’t matter how you charge.



There is a conflict no matter how you look at it.

[/quote]

Exactly.  The conflict is there no matter what.

[quote=Moraen] [quote=etj4588]

[quote=henryhill]First of all, the commission is $3500 for 100k in American funds.  Second, it depends on the client and the advisor.  If the advisor is putting the client in SMA’s or something like EDJ’s advisory solutions, the client may get better returns over the time period with the wrap fee.  Third, if you put the client in American funds “C” shares, they would be better off with the upfront “A” share. [/quote]Sorry, should have said that the RIA places the client into the same mutual fund at 1% yearly.In any case, you made my point.[/quote]



Do American funds have expenses or not?



Why would an RIA put someone in American funds anyway? Makes very little sense to me to use them.



The best reason is, even if this is the case, that client pays $3500 and then five years later, an Oppenheimer wholesaler convinces you that you should use American funds, but “here’s where Oppenhemier can add value”. Commission guy pulls out the switch letter, signs it and charges another 3.75%.



I can’t remember who said it best but, ethical is ethical. Doesn’t matter how you charge.



There is a conflict no matter how you look at it.

[/quote]

Anyone can have a potential conflict of interest but the fee-only adviser doesn’t have this particular one.  The SPDR 500 ETF can be had for a $10.00 trade plus a 10bps expense ratio.  The fee-only adviser isn’t charging a 3.5% load every 5 years on the same assets for funds with expense ratios over 1%.

Max, commissioned advisors don’t charge loads.

[quote=anonymous]Max, commissioned advisors don’t charge loads.[/quote]

You know what I meant.  American Funds charges a 3.5% “sales charge” for 100k.  Who gets that?

Have you ever read a prospectus?

Max, based upon what you have posted so far, it would be stupid of me to make any assumptions of you having knowledge.

[quote=anonymous]

Max, based upon what you have posted so far, it would be stupid of me to make any assumptions of you having knowledge.

[quote=Gordon Ramsey]Have you ever read a prospectus?

Read the prospectus.  There is a gross dealer concession.  This all goes to the broker/dealer.   The rep can get between none of that amount and all of it.  Registered reps get paid by broker/dealers and not from fund companies.

[quote=max] [quote=Gordon Ramsey]Have you ever read a prospectus?