The death of the pension?

[Tiggsy]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

But the good thing about pensions (which are capped) is that the rubbish flexibility is handy for the Gov. who dont want people spending all their flexible money before they are dead and then needing state support.

What have you done about your pension falling in value over the last few years??? Unless you are about to retire investing into cash instead of equities because your equities are rubbish is an odd choice. I'm about to go see a guy who put a lump sum in his pension with me 3 years ago - he's up 38.75%. The same fund used by a guy a saw last night who started 10 years ago - he's up 86.36% in that time.

None of them would want to be in cash and love their pensions (though they probably wouldnt waste their breath down the pub trying to compete with people that slag theirs off despite not having done anything about it)

[Ozzie Osmond]

Tiggsy said:

None of them would want to be in cash and love their pensions (though they probably wouldnt waste their breath down the pub trying to compete with people that slag theirs off despite not having done anything about it)

Yup.

Nobody is listening, but the people with any sense can still get a decent return from supposedly "riskier" investments.

Personally, my idea of "high risk" is money on deposit at 2.8% while inflation is running at 4%.

[crankedup]

Tiggsy said:

Right, because Maxwell stealing from his fund is all part and parcel of the current issue.

You might as well say Diana crashing her Merc is why large engined cars arent as popular right now.

Nonsense, it suggests that even these corporate giants are not adverse to dipping into funds when it suits them. And don't come back with 'Maxwell was a one off'.

[crankedup]

Tiggsy said:

Zod said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

In about 10 minutes time George Osbourne will pop up announcing, "ISA's are being abused as a tax-avoidance sheme for the rich" and slap a cap on the amount you can have have in one.

Er, there already is a cap on ISAs.

They wouldn't be floundering around like this if there weren't so many morons out there complaining that the rich avoid tax. Tax avoidance is legal. That's all there is to it.

I see people every day who moan that the rich get away with X,Y,Z - they then moan their pension is rubbish....they then explain they started it in 1990 and havent reviewed it since. Funnily enough, rich people do review their investments, maybe one reason they are rich.

Seems to me that 'rich'people (whatever that means) have access to the best investment advisers, and the proper wealthy (filthy rich) employ financial managers. Perhaps that accounts for the constant and wise review of investment by the more financially fortunate group of people rather than your suggestion that the 'average' investors are complacent. Personally I believe the scourge of overly complex and inherently poor investments which have been, up until recently, mis-sold to a gullible and believing public is a further reflection as to why the filthy rich have done rather well whilst others less so. Just a thought.

[Murph7355]

Zod said:

Er, there already is a cap on ISAs.

They wouldn't be floundering around like this if there weren't so many morons out there complaining that the rich avoid tax. Tax avoidance is legal. That's all there is to it.

Not minimising your tax using legal methods is frittering personal money away. Effectively it's a donation to "charity" (only one you'd probably not choose to give to if you thought about it).

"Tax avoidance" seems to being seen more and more a socially unacceptable thing than people claiming the maximum benefits they are able. Which seems properly messed up to me.

[markcoznottz]

Tiggsy said:

What have you done about your pension falling in value over the last few years??? I'm about to go see a guy who put a lump sum in his pension with me 3 years ago - he's up 38.75%. The same fund used by a guy a saw last night who started 10 years ago - he's up 86.36% in that time.

I'm sure you won't give any indication of how these investments have been made. How do they look when adjusted for inflation?.

[DoubleSix]

I'm bowing out. I was enjoying the conversation about ISAs, associated tax benefits, and the potential for caps.

However, when people start saying "I've made this much for my client...." and "I'm about to go and see so and so..." it all starts to sound a bit like a conversation I might hear between a few of our Junior Brokers in the bar. Not cool.

Adios

[Zod]

DoubleSix said:

Zod said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

In about 10 minutes time George Osbourne will pop up announcing, "ISA's are being abused as a tax-avoidance sheme for the rich" and slap a cap on the amount you can have have in one.

Er, there already is a cap on ISAs.

They wouldn't be floundering around like this if there weren't so many morons out there complaining that the rich avoid tax. Tax avoidance is legal. That's all there is to it.

No there isn't. There is a maximum annual allowance. No 'cap' on how much one can accumulate over the life of the ISA.

Exactly, an annual cap

[tomw2000]

DoubleSix said:

I'm bowing out. I was enjoying the conversation about ISAs, associated tax benefits, and the potential for caps.

However, when people start saying "I've made this much for my client...." and "I'm about to go and see so and so..." it all starts to sound a bit like a conversation I might hear between a few of our Junior Brokers in the bar. Not cool.

Adios

those are the bits on here i LOVE (...). I suggest PH provide a 'willy waving' - paying members only, forum.
Here people that want to post documentary evidence of their wealth/earnings (bank statements, tax returns etc).

I think it'd do really well. And the monthly fees generated can be donated to charidee. So who is in? Shall we call it £10k per month?

FFS. Lol...

[DoubleSix]

Zod said:

Exactly, an annual cap

Sorry Zod, but in Financial Services that would be referred to as a limit. A cap would refer to the total amount allowable during the product lifetime.

Pedantic maybe, but I'm sure you can appreciate the need for specific terminology being a Solicitor.

[Zod]

Thank you for the lesson, Mr Daimler.

[Tiggsy]

lol...and the above is why people think "pensions" suck!

the funds i put clients in are nothing fancy, the one i mentioned above is a bog standard managed fund from a well known firm...it's not some exclusive pot only available to the super rich! i'm not even that clever an adviser! what i DO WELL is see EVERY ONE of my clients EVERY YEAR....which means NONE of them are sat in crap funds for years on end which happens to most people.

my clients arent even that well off! many of them are plumbers, sparks, mechanics....on £30/40k pa.

the vast majority of people in the UK have pensions that NO ONE reviews...and then they moan that the fund performance is rubbish!!!

there are plenty of advisers on PH - i'd be surprised if many would say that their clients (assuming they look after them) would have been better off in cash than equities over the last 10 years.

Unfortunatly, people dont want to listen (unless its crap in The Mail) - I spend over £30k pa on a cold call firm to find me small business owners who I can chat to about pensions. The reason its so costly is they have to call THOUSANDS! because most say "NO" - yet we know they will have pensions, probably crappy ones, many unreviewed for years, some still in with profit funds that havent paid a bonus over 4% in 10 years.....many still pay into these, despite hating them! and all will moan at retirement that pensions suck.

Sure - some advisers suck worse than the pensions, and if you've tried some and had that experience thats rotten luck.....but thats not the norm (IME) The number of times I meet someone who has seen ANYONE in the last 5/10 years is VEY remote (compared to 15 years ago when there where 10 times the number of adviisers out there)

[Tiggsy]

lol...and the above is why people think "pensions" suck!

the funds i put clients in are nothing fancy, the one i mentioned above is a bog standard managed fund from a well known firm...it's not some exclusive pot only available to the super rich! i'm not even that clever an adviser! what i DO WELL is see EVERY ONE of my clients EVERY YEAR....which means NONE of them are sat in crap funds for years on end which happens to most people.

my clients arent even that well off! many of them are plumbers, sparks, mechanics....on £30/40k pa.

the vast majority of people in the UK have pensions that NO ONE reviews...and then they moan that the fund performance is rubbish!!!

there are plenty of advisers on PH - i'd be surprised if many would say that their clients (assuming they look after them) would have been better off in cash than equities over the last 10 years.

Unfortunatly, people dont want to listen (unless its crap in The Mail) - I spend over £30k pa on a cold call firm to find me small business owners who I can chat to about pensions. The reason its so costly is they have to call THOUSANDS! because most say "NO" - yet we know they will have pensions, probably crappy ones, many unreviewed for years, some still in with profit funds that havent paid a bonus over 4% in 10 years.....many still pay into these, despite hating them! and all will moan at retirement that pensions suck.

Sure - some advisers suck worse than the pensions, and if you've tried some and had that experience thats rotten luck.....but thats not the norm (IME) The number of times I meet someone who has seen ANYONE in the last 5/10 years is VEY remote (compared to 15 years ago when there where 10 times the number of adviisers out there)

[Randy Winkman]

crankedup said:

Seems to me that 'rich'people (whatever that means) have access to the best investment advisers, and the proper wealthy (filthy rich) employ financial managers. Perhaps that accounts for the constant and wise review of investment by the more financially fortunate group of people rather than your suggestion that the 'average' investors are complacent. Personally I believe the scourge of overly complex and inherently poor investments which have been, up until recently, mis-sold to a gullible and believing public is a further reflection as to why the filthy rich have done rather well whilst others less so. Just a thought.

Over the last 10 years or so, most regular folk have been "conned" out of the money, rather than helped to invest. Presumably so some big-shot can get a fat bonus for selling lots of product.

[fandango_c]

Randy Winkman said:

Over the last 10 years or so, most regular folk have been "conned" out of the money, rather than helped to invest. Presumably so some big-shot can get a fat bonus for selling lots of product.

Do you have any evidence of this or are you just making it up?

[groak]

I absolutely HATE it when the 'advisor' turns up in a crappier car than mine, wearing a cheaper suit than mine, and sporting a less flash watch than mine. You just KNOW there's about to be bit of your time wasted whilst some joker explains how you could be as poor as them.

Actually I'm only joking. I've a well tested and bombproof system for dry/sales calls which involves staff telling the caller to "fukk off and don't call back". The staff love doing it. Very occasionally a super-determined one really does get put through. That's when I get the opportunity to tell them the same thing myself.

Y'see I've got this theory. If there really was anything in whatever nonsense they're peddling, then the very last thing they'd be doing is wasting time cold calling people they didn't know, given how run off their feet they'd be handling the referrals from the satisfied and enriched customers they'd dealt with. People who're extremely good at what they do or have something very effective to offer don't need to market. The market comes to THEM.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Oh yeah. We've another recently invented cold call dealing technique called " You'll have to ask The Chicken". It's hilarious! Sometimes side-splittingly tears of laughter hilarious! There's really no point in getting annoyed about the endless cold/dry sales calls when you can have so much fun with them!

Edited by groak on Friday 20th April 23:41

[eharding]

groak said:

I absolutely HATE it when the 'advisor' turns up in a crappier car than mine, wearing a cheaper suit than mine, and sporting a less flash watch than mine. You just KNOW there's about to be bit of your time wasted whilst some joker explains how you could be as poor as them.

Actually I'm only joking. I've a well tested and bombproof system for dry/sales calls which involves staff telling the caller to "fukk off and don't call back". The staff love doing it. Very occasionally a super-determined one really does get put through. That's when I get the opportunity to tell them the same thing myself.

Y'see I've got this theory. If there really was anything in whatever nonsense they're peddling, then the very last thing they'd be doing is wasting time cold calling people they didn't know, given how run off their feet they'd be handling the referrals from the satisfied and enriched customers they'd dealt with. People who're extremely good at what they do or have something very effective to offer don't need to market. The market comes to THEM.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Oh yeah. We've another recently invented cold call dealing technique called " You'll have to ask The Chicken". It's hilarious! Sometimes side-splittingly tears of laughter hilarious! There's really no point in getting annoyed about the endless cold/dry sales calls when you can have so much fun with them!

Edited by groak on Friday 20th April 23:41

On the other hand, Groakster - how do you go about drumming up new business when things get a bit slow?

Stick your head out of the window, and threaten members of the general public in the street below with a pine-cone dipped in Dave's Insanity Sauce up the jacksie if they don't immediately dive into your retail establishment and part company with large quantities of wonga for whatever tat you're selling today?

I hate cold-callers as much as you do, probably more so. There are areas of enterprise where it is a necessary evil though. I just pity the poor sods who have to do it.

[Tiggsy]

groak said:

Y'see I've got this theory. If there really was anything in whatever nonsense they're peddling, then the very last thing they'd be doing is wasting time cold calling people they didn't know, given how run off their feet they'd be handling the referrals from the satisfied and enriched customers they'd dealt with. People who're extremely good at what they do or have something very effective to offer don't need to market. The market comes to THEM.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Correct. You're wrong.

Theres a few reasons:

firstly, people in the uk don't chat to their friends about their finances (unless it's a generic moan). It's not like "oh, who cuts your lawn....and hey, who does your pension"

Then there's the issue that most people are so bought into the "pensions suck" myth that hearing bob in the pub say otherwise is not likely to change their mind.

But the main one is that the VAST majority have too little. So even if bob tells jim how his pension is doing great, 9 times out of 10 I don't want jim as a client.

Over 15 years and many millions under management for happy people .... It's more cost effective to chuck thousands at a telesales firm to get meetings with keen people with decent business potential than have existing clients introduce me to their mate.

I'm sure Our tele guys get lots people give them the run around on the phone and laugh at the hassle they cause them.....statistically most will also have st pensions and whine to jim about it


Edit to add .... Just seen from groaks other threads (spell check changes groak to groan.....funny that) that he had an equitable life with profit pension. That's a pity you lucked out there but it's as far removed a vehicle from a decent run equity based, unit linked fund from the likes of fidelity, invesco, etc as you can get. If you bought a car from a maker who screwed up their build quality and the wheels fell off.....that wouldn't justify telling people to dump their Mercs and audis and get skate boards. I also note that you said you'd happily get by on the state pension, in which case you are in a very different boat to most of the people I talk to who want more than that, whatever their wealth.

It's a very good example of how taking the generic term "pension" and applying the pros and cons of one type from one provider to all of them is very silly.

Edited by Tiggsy on Saturday 21st April 01:10

[groak]

eharding said:

On the other hand, Groakster - how do you go about drumming up new business when things get a bit slow?

Stick your head out of the window, and threaten members of the general public in the street below with a pine-cone dipped in Dave's Insanity Sauce up the jacksie if they don't immediately dive into your retail establishment and part company with large quantities of wonga for whatever tat you're selling today?

I hate cold-callers as much as you do, probably more so. There are areas of enterprise where it is a necessary evil though. I just pity the poor sods who have to do it.

I don't hate cold callers. Fuxake, I've GOT a callcentre! And because I've got a callcentre as well as a history in telesales going right back to my own Thomson training in the early'70's I know a great deal about telecan....from writing the scripts to training the staff to even supplying the products for both inbound and outbound, and I can tell you the effective strike rate for many many products using telecan from live stat and data. Outbound is so yesteryear it's a virtual near death experience. If I told you the positive response from, say, coldcall advertising sales in the '70's you'd say I was lying. And I operated telecan in financial services from '89 to '93, and again from '07 to '09 and trust me....the positive responses to the appointment making sale show a steady year on year drop that hasn't stopped declining since the 60's or so when the yanks first invented the concept! The freak on this thread reckons he spends £30kpa on cold calling. Inhouse that buys you 1 mid-level ability canvasser plus the costs of the op. Or about 1500 'chair hours' if you're outsourcing to a centre. That's a peanut spend. Strictly smalltime. None the less, 99% of the calls will be no-sales. On pensions, if the canvassers are any good, they'll get an appointment from one in every hundred calls they make. Not a sale...just an appointment. That's why these days it's rare to get a financial services telesales call. Because it's NOT cost effective. Sheeesh! Even the sharks in PPI claims know that, which is why, these days, almost all of them use callbots instead of canvassers. TBH they're slightly less annoying than the humans, because you just immediately ring off when the bot-spiel begins.

It's also, of course, why all the giant financial institutions from America to China laid so much emphasis on the 'prospecting for referrals' aspect of sales training. Actually I had a brokerage...a very successful mortgage brokerage....which was entirely built by exploiting the sales training from a financial multinational on referral-prospecting. And it really is true. You only need one...or a handful at most...of clients to set a snowball in motion.

Yer man here is still trying to build a client bank via telecan after FIFTEEN YEARS!! And claims to give them all regular annual visits! LOL!!!
Oh dear! 'decent (sic) run unitlinked equity fund' indeed! Next he'll be telling us he stacks up new business from SMS texting!!

Anyway. I'm recently back in 'financial services' in a way. Payday loans and cheque cashing. We have bought a high street shop and stuck a big fascia board on it with 'PAYDAY LOANS' and 'CHEQUE CASHING' and the phone number all in 18 inch high lettering. And the shop is being fitted and isn't even open yet, and the number of calls diverting to my mobile and now referrals (because people certainly do talk to each other about financial matters) means there ain't going to be a dime spent on any form of marketing for a very long time. The demand for fast money and cheque cashing is MASSIVE.

Well that's the latest one.

But I'd be very interested...and I mean seriously professionally interested.... in anything you think requires outbound telecan to make it profitable. Sure there's businesses that require inbound callcentre functions. And certain some that tinker with limited period campaigns with outbound. The money in outbound is in selling data lists...what are they called...'qualified leads'. Load of rubbish mostly. And the rest is about cold calling from directories etc. And, as I said, that was out of function as an effective marketing technique long long ago. Deader than a unit linked equity based private pension!

[RDMcG]

I often wonder how much people understand about actuarial tables, and how long one might live after retirement. If you retire at (say) 60, you will likely live to 80. Your working life of (say) 40 years or less has to fund another 50% of living. It takes a fair amount of planning to survive and also to leave sufficient funds to your wife, you will typically outlive you.

A traditional pension will not do it unless you have and indexed public sector pension. he good old days are gone.