December 3, 2018
1. Overall, do you find the Relationship Summary useful? If not, how would you change it? If so, what topics and how can they be improved?:
Useful, yes
But a better solution would be if I could be assured that when anyone is providing investment advice and I am in some way paying a fee and regardless of the type of account the person is held to a STRICT FIDUCIARY STANDARD
Why should their title or type of firm matter
Why should I need to worry whether the person is acting in my best interest or in their own best interest
Frankly, you are too soft on the industry and are leaving investors to fend for themselves
2. How useful is each section of the Relationship Summary? Please consider explaining your responses in the comments:
a. Type of Relationship and Service: Useful:
b. Our Obligations to You: Useful: More specific detail would be beneficial
c. Fees and Costs: Useful:
d. Comparison to different account types: Not Useful: Why should it matter, that is really one of the problems
All accounts, all advisors one standard should be the goal
I have been investing for 43 years and not sure I could accurately define differences between
Financial advisor
Financial planner
Broker
Investment advisor
Investment manager
Investment representative
And about a dozen additional terms I see on business cards
e. Conflict of Interests: Not Useful: How through or complete is the disclosure
Direct and indirect comflicts need to be more well explained and how am I to protect myself from the conflict negatively impacting me
f. Additional Information: Useful:
g. Key Questions to Ask: Not Useful:
3. Please answer the following questions. Please consider explaining your responses in the comments:
a. Do you find the format of the Relationship Summary easy to follow?: Yes:
b. Is the information in the appropriate order?: Somewhat: Conflicts seems buried to deeply
c. Is the Relationship Summary easy to read?: No:
d. Should the Relationship Summary include additional information about different account types?: :
e. Would you seek out additional information about a firm's disciplinary history as suggested in the Relationship Summary?: No: Why not just include in this document, I dont want to run all over the internet, just another obstacle to full disclosure
4. Are there topics in the Relationship Summary that are too technical or that could be improved?:
The inherent risk of the conflicts is not well developed
5. Is there additional information that we should require in the Relationship Summary,such as more specific information about the firm or additional information about fees? Is that because you do not receive the information now, or because you would also like to see it presented in this summary document, or both? Is there any information that should be made more prominent?:
What can I expect and not expect about the independence and conflict-free nature of the advice
6. Is the Relationship Summary an appropriate length? If not, should it be longer or shorter?:
It would be less detailed if all providing advice were held to a strict fiduciary standard
7. Do you find the 'Key Questions to Ask' useful? Would the questions improve the quality of your discussion with your financial professional? If not, why not?:
Why not just require answers to be provided to each question
8. Do you have any additional suggestions to improve the Relationship Summary? Is there anything else you would like to tell us?:
More focus on conflicts of interest