Having conducted analysis of monthly ASIC data, Lafitani Sotiriou of Bell Potter issued a note to subscribers, seen by ifa, which said there are movements afoot within the ANZ-owned licensees.
“The parts of ANZ Wealth that [IOOF] is purchasing lost a further 11 advisers to bring the total below 700 (now 699),” Mr Sotiriou explained.
“When [IOOF] announced the deal, ANZ Wealth had around 720 advisers. If [ANZ] continues to lose advisers at this rate, IOOF will end up with around 130 [fewer] advisers by the time they actually get the asset, [which is] a significant risk to the earnings guidance provided by the company.”
Mr Sotiriou has previously argued that the price paid by IOOF for the ANZ Wealth assets was “too high” and that the big four bank was wise to exit the wealth management market given the “structural shift towards independence”.
The comments come as the directors of an ANZ-aligned practice have been permanently banned by ASIC for making false insurance applications without client permission.
ANZ confirmed it was offloading its dealer groups to IOOF in October, explaining the sale was part of its strategy to create a “simpler, better balanced bank”. Its life insurance arm remains on the market.
“By partnering with IOOF, we are able to create greater value for our shareholders while also providing our customers with access to quality wealth products from a specialist provider with the right cultural fit, financial strength and digital capability,” said ANZ group executive, wealth, Alexis George at the time of the announcement.
ifa first predicted an ANZ-IOOF transaction in November 2016 when a spokesperson for the former friendly society confirmed that the ANZ wealth business “presents very attractively”.
Perhaps you need to put a correction in Aleks as not all the ADGs are losing advisers I keep seeing one group in the newspapers although they aren’t fully owned by ANZ which may be the reason
Aleks, very light journalism here !! Cmon your much better than that !!
This seems unfair IOOF bashing. 20 advisers leaving is nothing and they may have been planning this already or recognise they may not fit the IOOF model. We are an AR of an IOOF dealership and unlike some dealerships they do not just take on anyone. We have found them very strict but with an excellent service.
Did IOOF not pay their advertising invoice to IFA this month?
Hilarious..it’s good reading but and very relevant. Perhaps come the Royal Commission any IOOF aligned business will basically be forced to rebrand to IOOF me thinks. You may as well ring up AMP and ask how they’re going my IOOF fellows…. Maybe if you’re a Retireinvest adviser and the like you’d be thinking your dealer group fees are going go up because ANZ is no longer supporting the business.
Not sure 20 or so less Advisers (of about 700) is a big deal. That would be about the normal attrition and retirement rate at less than 3%. What is probably meaningful is the net total number based on a, seemingly, very light recruitment rate?
I think the term ‘flee’ is a little dramatic. I think some of the smaller businesses have had it made clear that they don’t fit the model and have been required to move to other Dealer Groups.. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing as Business Models and Business Models and you need to find the best fit for you and your clients..
Its a bit of a non-story. Going through a bit of IOOF bashing at the moment – must be their turn.
The plans for these ’11’ ARs would have already been either retiring, leaving the industry or changing the dealer groups before the IOOF announcement.
Surely Therewould be a clause in the IOOF purchase agreement to recalculate the price at the time of the transaction.