Financial Planner

17 years ago

Anyone uses a financial planner?

What kind of service/assistance do you recieve from your financial planner?

How did you find him/her?

What are your expectations of the service?

What is the fee structure? Is it worthwhile to use the service?

Any experience you would like to share will be very appreciated.

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (12)

steve_o
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
My financial planner is me. However, I arrived at that choice after consulting with a fee-paid financial planner, who confirmed that I was on the right track.

What kind of service/assistance do you recieve from your financial planner?

We (I was married at the time) were interviewed to determine our goals and financial preferences. The planner then came up with a (written) plan which recapped our current situation and made recommendations for how to achieve our financial goals. Her recommendations were somewhat generic (for instance, instead of saying "Invest in Acme's Pork Belly Futures Index Fund", she'd say "Consider investing in a mutual fund that concentrates on commodity futures"). She then followed up with us six months and a year later to see if we had questions or wanted additional advice.

How did you find him/her?

Given that this was B.C. (Before Computers and the Internet), we simply searched for fee-paid financial advisors and decided to go with what was Investor's Diversified Services (IDS) at the time (now Ameriprise).

What are your expectations of the service?

My expectations were that our goals would be evaluated in light of reality (that is, we were not going to double our money in ten years with absolutely no risk); that recommendations would not be specific to a financial firm (that is, no commission was paid by any firm to the advisor); and that the advisor would have sufficient knowledge of what-all was out there to determine appropriate investment vehicles for us (not to simply give us a graph telling us how to invest in the stock market if it made more sense for us to include some real estate, annuities, or whatever).

What is the fee structure? Is it worthwhile to use the service?

IIRC, the generic consultation and advice was a one-time fee. Additional advice (either to select investment vehicles or to address changing goals or life conditions) was charged for hourly.

Was it worthwhile? I think so. Many people simply do not understand investment principles -- or don't care to. Many people may not be aware of the breadth of opportunities out there. I happened to be interested in investing, so I pursued it myself. I mostly wanted confirmation that I was on the right track (and I got that). It was, for me, a "tune-up", if you will. It's a bit like having a professional housepainter review your DIY technique and assure you that you're not doing anything wrong and, in fact, are doing (most of) it right.
zone_8grandma
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Anyone uses a financial planner?
We (DH and I ) do

What kind of service/assistance do you recieve from your financial planner?
We receive advice/recommendations on asset allocation, how to structure our assets so as to maximize the odds of reaching our financial goals and periodic "checks" to see how we are progressing toward our goal (retirement).

How did you find him/her?
I asked around (friends and former co-workers) for recommendations. Also looked around on our own. Interviewed several until we found one we "clicked" with.

What are your expectations of the service?
First of all, I'm very involved with our financial planning. I have the time, inclination, and interest. However, DH seems more comfortable taking advice from a professional, so I've been able to get him to take a number of steps that he should have taken years ago (but he wouldn't listen to me) by asking the financial planner about it. For example, DH had a number of accounts (he wasn't even sure what they were worth) started 20+ years ago. He had stocks in different accounts. He had no idea of our net worth. Now everything is with one institution - IRA accounts and non IRA accounts. We get a summary statement as well as detailed individual statements so we know where we stand.
Anytime I feel we need to make a major financial decision, I can call him up and discuss it or arrange a meeting. He often asks questions we hadn't considered.

What is the fee structure?
His fee is 1% (annualy) of our account

Is it worthwhile to use the service?
For us it is. Your mileage may vary.

Any experience you would like to share will be very appreciated.
One small incident recently boosted my confidence in our guy. I asked him whether DH should take his retirment in a lump sum or in a lifetime pension (I fully expected him to say "take the lump sum - I can invest it for you"). He asked several questions and strongly suggested he take the lifetime pension.
Related Discussions
How to talk to Parents about their finances
Q
Comments (3)
Some parents don't want to talk to their children about their finances. In certain instances I can understand why. But retiree's still need to make arrangements for their later years so they don't end up having strangers decide who will care for them and where they will live when they can no longer choose for themselves. I picked up the following book at the library. Scary stuff. Provides all the right reasons why its better to make ANY plans rather than none at all. The Retirement Nightmare: How to Save Yourself from Your Heirs and Protectors : Involuntary Conservatorships and Guardianships (Golden Age Series) (Paperback)ISBN-10: 1573927961 by Diane G. Armstrong Ph.D.
...See More
Met with financial planner yesterday (retirement)
Q
Comments (42)
I'll be happy to help you with this. First of all, there are two different reduction calculations: one for the basic insurance and one for the option B insurance. It sounds like your question pertains to the basic insurance. As I stated in an earlier post, it appeared that your husband had calculated the basic insurance premium based on a 50% reduction at age 65. What this means is that starting with the 2nd month following his 65th birthday, the amount of his basic insurance will decrease 1% per month for 50 months until the amount of the insurance is only 50% of what it was when he retired. So, if he started with $150,000 of basic life insurance, it would end up being $75,000 when he is 69. The amount that he pays will change from .925 per thousand to .325 per thousand at age 65 and will continue for as long as he lives. He could also choose the "no reduction" option, in which case the basic insurance would never be reduced and the full $150,000 would be payable upon his death. However, instead of paying .925 per $1000, his premium would start off at more than double that amount. He would be paying $2.155 per $1000. Finally, he also could choose the 75% reduction which of course is the cheapest. He would start off paying only .325 per $1000, but at age 65 the amount of basic life insurance would begin reducing at the rate of 2% per month until only 25% was left. So, if he started with 150,000 worth of basic insurance, he would be left with only 37,500 by age 68. However, he would stop paying premiums at age 65 and the 37,500 worth of insurance would be free for the rest of his life. Similar choices must be made with regard to the optional insurance, but I believe that those choices don't have to be made until he is 65. Let me know if you want me to go into detail about the optional insurance (which represents about $300,000 of his coverage). I hope that this explanation has helped somewhat.
...See More
paying cash for a house part 2
Q
Comments (31)
i agree with you conceptually about only investing in thing you believe in, or rather in things you can stomach as most investments and industries have a downside if you look hard enough. eventually you get to exploited workers and poisoned rivers and solid waste. i personally struggled with the payday investment i made. the return was high, but i did not want to be associated with it. i said no for about 6 months. over that six months i learned how they (where my money is now) did business. after i understood it i had a hard time thinking of it any differently than a bank. they both loan money based on ones ability to earn money and pay it back. the only difference is the duration and the size of the loan. a bank allows me to spend money i don't have on a credit card and then charges me 13-18% until i pay them back while they themselves are leveraged 10 to 1 on those dollars loaned. the payday place will only loan me money that will be covered in my NEXT paycheck and charge me a flat fee of $5 or $10 while they themselves have a dollar for every dollar they loan out. when i look at it like that i really had no problem with the payday place, but started to have them with the banks. the payday places are not dragging the economy down because of their recklessness. they are also not enslaving an entire generation by offering them credit they cannot pay back. there are people who use them recklessly, and it is real easy to point them out because they are the fringe. it is a little harder to point out the middle class suburbanite who is a slave to their credit card and bank because they get up and go to work each day and keep a nice yard but are living on credit. both industries lend money and both are technically guilty of charging people who don't have money. they are in business to make money, not give it away. in the end neither is good nor bad just as fire is neither good nor bad. the good or bad all depends on who uses it and how they use it. the payday places service a far less afluent and unsophisticated clientele and therefore gives them very little wiggle room to abuse the system. if they want to stay one paycheck behind for the rest of their lives, that is about all they can do. the bank will let me get decades behind because they assume i am responsible and won't let it come to that but do little to stop me and recently have even encouraged me to do so. in my mind it is a match compared to the bonfire. both can be abused, but the potential abuse of a credit card is far greater. but there may be other payday places that have different policies than where i invested. mind you i don't have equity in the payday placeï¿½"they borrowed money from me to lend. in short my money is on deposit to be lent out just as if i put it in a savings account for the bank to lend out on a credit card loan. the main difference is my rate of return is almost 10 times higher but not FDIC insured. the only thing i do struggle with is the 10% they charge for cashing checks. this is outrageous in my opinion. i can't understand why anybody would do that unless they were unable to cash it elsewhere and i won't speculate as to why. but in the end they have their reason and are paying a premium for it. and with that i leave it. cigarettes are another issue and i am totally with you. i feel the same way about other products as well most are not as overtly damaging, but their products do carry liability and they push them with abandon to those who are hurt by them. not just talking guns and alcohol. a few minutes watching saturday morning cartoons was an eyeopener to the type of products marketed to kids. slap a mcdonald's logo on a bucket of mud and i think my kids would want to eat it. a friend of mine who is militant about his hate for phillip-morris and smoking in general (i think he lost a parent to lung cancer) holds half his portfolio in tobacco stocks. he justification was that it "those people" are going to annoy him with their smoke and take his taxes in healthcare, they are going to pay him for it. an interesting take on moral investing practices, but for him it makes sense. i respect your desire to not follow my practice of investing in payday lending. we not only have to undderstand our investments, but repect if not love them. i do not love payday lending, and to be honest would rather be elsewhere, but for the time being it is a good place and i am no so morally apposed to money lending as to not take the opportunity. i do however own no bank stocks for obvious reasons, i think their model is risky. i also think they are on the more unethical side of business. they have laws and loopholes that allow them to do things that are illegal to any other company. id it because we need their services and that is what it takes, or is it because they have power to influence if not make laws that favor them? i think recent events have shown us it is a little of both. before i sound too anti-establishment, let me say i think financial institutions are important and necessaryï¿½"ie. banks, insurance companies, the US government, the FED, and even payday lenders. BUT they are in busniness to make themselves rich, not us. if you do not understand what they are doing, how they make money, or worse, what you are doing, they will take advantage of you. thus education. it is through education that you can see the smoke and mirrors they use to make you feel good about making them rich at your expense. one of the most ubiquitous is the home mortgage. i am emphatic that the most expensive ways to buy a house are in this order; cash, paid off early mortgage, continually refinanced mortgage, a 15-year note, a 30-year note, ARM, variable rate, interest only, and deferred interest-AKA sub-prime being the cheapest. that said, i don't like differed interest as it assumes the risk in the real estate market and if used by the uneducated or irresponsible it can (and has) blown up in the borrowers face. what does the bank want you to do? they love you to take out a 30 year and refinance every few years or pay it off early. if you are going to take it to term, they prefer you take out a 15-year because it makes them more money and that is why they have a cheaper rate to take itï¿½"they need to give you incentive to do what benefits them and think you are getting the better end of the dealï¿½"if it makes them more money, how can it also save you money and show up in two places at once? this all sounds like hericy i know. but where do we get our financial education from? our bank? alan greenspan has a nice quote about the variable interest only mortgage being the best deal out there if people only knew how to use it and the 30 year not serving its customers as the think. i will see if i can find it. the mortgage subject was perhaps the most eye-opening and influential education i ever had in finance. it is the lesson that taught me to see the whole equation and not look at a financial strategy in a vacuum. it taught me to understand finance on a macro economic level to understand how to best use products on a micro economic level. it is painful and feels like you brain is removed and turned around and put back in. but i assure you it is all true and useful information, but it requires the user to be responsible for their financial life and some are not willing to do this and for them it is not wise to have control. just as fire in the hands a of one is destructive and to another the opposite. what i am talking about is basic business financeï¿½"in short figuring out the lost opportunity cost and the taking the greatest margin. if done properly with understanding risk is minimized and growth is maximized. some will refuse to believe, but that does not prove those strategies wrong. i myself do not practice whole-heartedly all the strategies i know an believe because of issues regarding timing, my own laziness or whatever. this does not mean i don't acknowledge their strengths or potential. but it serves me to understand alternatives. there are many i have encountered on this forum and in other places who flat out throw up a wall and won't even try to understand that there are several strategies to use in every situation and they all have merits. my beef is with those who claim merits that are not truly there or ignore others. those who emotionally attach themselves to dogma that was sold to them without trying to understand. i have been guilty of this and still am at times and it only hurts myself. when i have a few hours to spend with a calculator, i will start a new thread and actually run the numbers on the most popular mortgage products side-by-side including paying cash. i will treat all as equals. it is amazing how different the outcome is from popular beliefs, but if you look at who is selling the mortgages and the information i guess it is not shocking. it won't prove anything other than which is the most expensive in terms of money and what risks are inherent in each scenario. the individual would have to choose which is best for them. the problem is that most choose the wrong thing for what they claim to want. if you know how they each work you can choose more appropriately for your goals whatever they may be.
...See More
Are annuities really safe?
Q
Comments (18)
Vesur first joined this site on Jan 22, 2014. __________________________ Rates offered on annuities have a close relationship to interest rates offered at the time that they are set up. As you've heard, our governments have been keeping interest rates low, the reason claimed to be to encourage our entrepreneurs to invest, to get our economy growing again. They don't mention that they owe huge amounts of money ... and growing monthly ... so the idea of having to pay higher rates of interest on that huge and growing debt ... makes their hair stand on end (if those old mostly male legislators have much left). But ... considering that huge and growing debt ... if they don't offer increased interest rates, aren't potential investors going to be unwilling to lend them money, fearing that they won't be able to pay off their debts? Plus ... as they are printing money hand over fist ... won't buyers of those bonds fear that, what with so many more dollars floating around ... that they'll be paid off with dollars that won't buy much? On our province-wide phone-in discussion group weekdays at noon for an hour on our national radio, a little over a year ago the question of the day was, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?". I don't remember how much attention was paid to the matter of four years from late '12 having been late '08, which, with early '09, was a bad time to be in the stock market. I said that I was ... but only because I disobeyed the usual advice given to people about their investment planning. We've been told that we should invest in equities, stocks, real estate, etc. where there's a good possibility of growth when we're young, with many years ahead to replace possible losses - a long time horizon. About 80% equities, 20% bonds at age 20. Yeah, right: when young folks carry student debt, maybe have credit card debt, are buying a car, renting/buying a roof over their heads, getting married ... having kids. As we age, to shift a percentage of our assets into more secure investments and fewer in the volatile ones, e.g. at 35, 65% equities, 35% bonds and other quaranteed-asset instruments: at age 50, about 50-50. At 80, they recommend that we have 80% bonds, GICs, CDs, etc. where the amount of the principal is guaranteed not to shrink (and carries another never-mentioned guarantee ... that, apart from the rent on the money, it isn't going to grow, either). But, as each dollar's value shrinks each year, due to inflation, I must put part of the rent with the principal in order to maintain its purchasing power at the earlier level. In Canada, interest income is taxed at top marginal rate ... with no offsetting credits. If I buy a bond paying 2%, and am in 25% tax bracket, that reduces my after-tax retention to 1.5% ... and have you heard what the official rate of inflation is, these days? When I take that 2% official rate from the 1.5% left to me after taxes are paid ... I'm under water! Losing money. And ... have you visited a grocery store lately? Do you agree that prince increases there, or in other areas of the economy (apart from wage rates), are limited to 2%? At age 80+ ... I was better off at the time of the phone-in (and even more so, now) than I was 4 years previously ... and for one reason, only: I'm invested 80% in well-chosen, quality equities. And I own a major proportion of the asset in stocks of quality corporations that I own directly, not through mutual funds, most of whom, in Canada, take on an annual basis, about a quarter to a third of average, long-term growth rates in the stock market ... and they get theirs, every year, even if there is no growth ... and they have no skin in the game (except that, if you get mad enough at their low rates of growth, about 85 - 90 percent of the time not outperforming the sector of the market in which they invest, you take your money and invest elsewhere). ole joyful
...See More
dave_donhoff
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Hi azmom,

Anyone uses a financial planner?

You bet... I've surrounded myself with them (but it's my industry anyway... and I have an "immersive" nature as well....)

What kind of service/assistance do you recieve from your financial planner?

There are many angles to financial planning... and although I know of firms that CAN offer something from every perspective, I have RARELY FOUND* a single individual who can effectively "step back" and look at the entire big picture and actually apply the various critical knowledge details to map out a full, comprehensive plan.

(*The ONLY exception being "fee only" professionals who are not compensated on transaction frequency or account sizes... but either hourly fees (no incentive against your best interests... but really no incentive FOR your best interests either,) or an annual percentage of your total Net Worth GROWTH (which means they win when/if you win, and get less, or nothing, if you do not win... little or no compensation for financially 'treading water.')

From a very HIGH LEVEL, GENERAL perspective, the areas that need to be coordinated and planned are;
A) Assets (this is what much of the industry solely focuses on,)

B) Risk Coverage (mostly done with insurance... which, unfortunately, is too rarely "planned" and too frequently "pushed." Everyone who is beyond being single, renting a shared room and earning minimum wage, needs SOME degree of protective coverage... The more you have (income, assets, dependents, etc.,) the more you need further levels of properly fit coverage... however, as with food "more is not necessarily better." Being properly custom FIT with coverage is the critical piece a planner needs to be able to do... and that changes (just like human bodies being fit for clothes) over time.

C) Safe Savings (and the avoidance of 'deadening' the family portfolio by putting TOO MUCH in 'safe' savings when it may be neither safe, nor properly earning what the family needs it to earn.)

D) LEVERAGE/DEBT Management. Eliminating 'naked debt' is critical... but too often confused with the use of 'tax-preferenced asset leverage.' Debts such as consumer credit generally reduce the family net worth and safety, while properly used tax-preferenced asset leverage (mortgages and business credit) generally increase family net worth and safety. The critical issue is how to know which is which, and how to treat them (which are polar opposites.)

E) Tax Planning. Waiting until it's time to do your tax returns before you pay attention to your tax details is analogous to going to a single aerobics class once a year and wondering why you can't catch your breath. Some people are comfortable (or willing to struggle) with the basic forms of tax returns once a year... but MOST people are confused & overwhelmed by the moving-target details of structuring your financial life so that you are "least bitten" by the tax wolves. Just the difference of keeping 10% more of what is yours every year (and having it work in compounding returns) is a HUGE piece in the puzzle of what you are left with at retirement... and having someone who lives, eats, and breathes (and stays sane) in the world of taxes and the IRS code changes is a critical support.

How did you find him/her?

A) I lurk (and participate) at various financial communities online (like this one... though I don't know any other planners here...)
B) I ask those I know (and am impressed by) for introductions to others THEY know in ancillary expertise fields.

What are your expectations of the service?

Someone who LOVES the corner of the industry they specialize in, and just devours the concepts on an ongoing basis. I seek "no b.s." sincerety and integrity... someone I COULD trust to toss my house-keys to if they were in town while I was away on vacation. Someone who has the same perspective on comprehensive and balanced planning... same ideas about life, and what "retirement" does and does not mean... and the ability to truly LISTEN, and if they do not understand, to ASK....

What is the fee structure? Is it worthwhile to use the service?

Above are my perspectives on BEST fee structures. Since I have no single "captain" (but reserve that hat for myself) I have different incremental arrangements with the players on my 'financial support board.' For anyone desiring to NOT wear the "captain's hat" I would recommend SELECTING a 'captain' (or "lead advisor") with the idea that they will NOT be relied on to be the "one size fits all specialist" (which is simply unrealistic) but rather the "quarterback" for the professional team YOU OWN who are all facing the same goalposts that you are, and win when you win.

Is it worthwhile?
If you choose your professionals carefully, and stay in regular contact so THEY know they are taking you where you want to go... DEFINITELY!

Cheers,
Dave Donhoff
Strategic Equity & Mortgage Planner
joyfulguy
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Good advice above.

If you deal with a person who's really a salesperson, expect that person's recommendations to be slanted toward the stuff that s/he sells, usually a limited number of items, among a wide variety of financial goods available.

Many say that they'd like unbiased advice, but are reluctant to pay for it.

If you buy mutual funds, the Management Expense Ratio will eat up a fair percentage of the annual growth (if there is any - but even if there isn't, the fund manager gets his/her regular percentage of the asset, in any case).

Few of them can outproduce the market averages, over the long term. Part of the reason being that annual percentage that they get paid.

Learn how to invest and buy stocks on your own - that way, you can pocket the management fee (if you become smart enough to have your asset grow as well as the fund manager did).

Learning how money works - an interesting hobby, if it interests you. That pays well.

In Canada, the money management magazine that I figure to be the best carries no ads, is totally subscriber-driven. When they asked for advice, subscribers asked for seminars with the people who write the articles, and for subscribers in an area to get together.

Such a group in our city has been meeting monthly (year-round, as money works 24/7/12) for over 10 years, I've been attending for six or seven, and have learned a lot, as there are a variety of approaches taken by the 20 or so usual attendees.

A quotation heard there is, "Losses in investing is the tuition fee for learning how money works".

Good wishes as you pursue your financial (and other worthwhile) goals.

ole joyful ... over 20 years a personal financial advisor, most of them selling no financial stuff

P.S. If you check back through the "Money Saving Tips" and "Household Finance" forums, you'll find a number of messages that I've posted on the subject, which you might find of interest.

o j
chisue
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
We used a certified financial planner (Check those credentials, folks!) for three years, partly because we were liquidating some of our portfolio to build a house and buy a Maui condo. The planner was "free" for a year -- including no brokerage fees for sales.

After the free year, the tab was 1% of the portfolio managed.

I think this can be a good idea, but it wasn't cost effective for us, with a very conservative portfolio and little "balancing" needed. Once you've built your bridge of T-notes, CDs or whatever and have a few mutual funds of various ilks, exactly what is the advisor doing besides sending you a statement every month and telling you how wisely you and he are handling things? It just wasn't appropriate in our case -- although I think it can be excellent for younger, more aggressive portfolios.

Thank goodness we did liquidate what we did, when we did. Saved losing a third on the crash five years ago. Just lucky. The remaining portfolio has only caught up in the last two years, whereas the portion we invested in the house and the condo has skyrocketed. And, we are *enjoying* them!
bushleague
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
We did for some time (1998-2002) however have been managing our own portfolios thanks to the internet and online brokerage accounts. In the past three years alone we have paid off our house (a custom Maine post and Beam On Cape Cod Bay) and purchased six other pieces of real estate.

Chisue where all is your place in Maui, we bought a big lot up on a hill but I'm not quite sure where it is?
chelone
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
We use one, too. We "found" him because he was the guy who oversaw the SEP plan at the helpmeet's place of employment. We started out slowly with him, listening to his advice and asking questions of him.

His fee is under 1% of the portfolio he oversees. We meet with him quarterly now. In the time we've worked with him he has come to understand that we are informed and politically aware. We are patient, dedicated investors, not interested in huge returns. We live below our means and don't carry debt.

We are "worker bees", the helpmeet and I. When we're finished at work our idea of a pleasant leisure time activity is not poring over financials or hunting up value stocks. I'd rather take the dog outdoors, work in the garden, strip furniture, or go sailing.

He has been very helpful for us; for precisely the same reason that Zone 8grandma gave. The helpmeet and I have very different feelings about money; he is much more secure about having it and spending it than I am. But I am the patient, methodical investor who tends to regard contributions to investment funds as "bills", something that MUST be paid. Our planner was instrumental in directing us to pull into the "yoke" together and then patiently explaining how our diligence has paid off over time.
chisue
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
bushleague -- We own at Maui Kamaole in South Kihei, near the border with Wailea. We hadn't intended to buy TWO properties in 2001, but had an Illinois rental sell after being on the market for a long time and had to do a 1039.

We've been visiting Hawaii for years and had stayed the prior February at MK, so knew it was good for us. Bought sight-unseen. The seller was willing to do all the grunt work of gutting and refurbishing for us. Closed Feb. 1 and "moved in" for the month.

It's in a rental pool with an agency, but I do most of the bookings via vrbo.com. Look us up! We're #8049. The condo has more than doubled in price, although who knows what 2007 will bring. It carries itself with the rentals and has been much easier to manage than any SFH we owned and rented out. We no longer fret over where we can rent in the winter; have a "free" Maui home; tax benefits are good, too.

I'd love to know where on Maui your "hill" is located. Do you get out there often? Plan to build? South Maui or West?

chelone -- Glad you are both happy building up your security. We did the same, but it got to a point when I said, "Why aren't we enjoying some of this portfolio in our daily lives?" Not that we *squandered* anything, but we were living far below our means, and for what? Our retirement is as secure as we can make it, so enough already! Maybe it's a Senior thing...time's a-wastin'! LOL
chelone
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Chisue, we got a "late start", having paid the house off first. At present, we're buckling down and directing as much as possible to "retirement", squeezing as much "fun" into the equation as we're comfortably able. Still, we lack for nothing.

Our day will come... and we'll have everything... we'll share the joys...

;)
3katz4me
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I don't though I think I should. I've interviewed a few but haven't found one I trust - too many salespeople and others motivated by their own financial gain. I get some advice from my CPA and he has recommended someone I may consider who is not a financial planner/advisor but a highly educated financial analyst who has started his own investment firm - his fees are less than 1% of portfolio - can't remember exactly. His business is doing very well - low overhead, low fees.

For now I think I'm doing okay on my own - no debt other than a second home, plenty of short term liquid funds, and investing alot in aggressive investments for retirement time horizon which is about 17 years away. As I get closer to retirement I think I will need a little more advice on asset allocation - but maybe by then I'll take the time to learn more about this and figure it out myself.
joyfulguy
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
There are some plans that don't take a lot of work or time, or a major knowledge of the market, that (in a Canadian parallel system) have produced returns much above the market average, and the growth record of all but about 1% of mutual funds.

At the investment time-wise of just a few hours - per year.

The mutual fund managers get paid, whether you make anything or not.

Good wishes for developing into a skilled manager of income and assets - and for correlating your family's attitudes about money, if they are somewhat divergent currently.

ole joyful
azmom
Original Author
17 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Just came back from a long business trip. I would like to offer a belated "thank you" to all of you who posted on this thread. The experiences and insights you shared here are informative and invaluable; we truly appreciate that.

Both DH and I are not experts, but we are financial literate and understand risks associated with different kind of investments. We have been saving and investing since our first jobs and have built two portfolios that reflect our own investing styles. Our problem is lacking of time. For several years, not spending enough time on the investments has resulted lackluster returns, a pile of idle cash, poor tax and estate planning, thus we are considering enlisting the help from a financial planner.

Your feedbacks opened our eyes and gave us options to consider. In the meantime, we are examining our own financial situation to determine such as what level of assistance we need in which areas, how much control we would feel comfortable to delinquent, and how we want to integrate portfolios that fit big picture but also satisfy our individual investing style.

Again, thank you so much for the inputs.

Financial Planner

Comments (12)

steve_o

zone_8grandma

Related Discussions

dave_donhoff

joyfulguy

chisue

bushleague

chelone

chisue

chelone

3katz4me

joyfulguy

azmom
Original Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Financial Planner

Comments (12)

Related Discussions

azmomOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

azmom
Original Author