In a statement to the ASX, the bank has announced its plans to create a new, separate business called CFS Group, which will include Colonial First State, Count Financial, Financial Wisdom, Colonial First State Global Asset Management and Aussie Home Loans.
The bank will also conduct a strategic review of its general insurance business, including a potential sale, the statement said.
“These initiatives will result in the creation of a leading independent wealth management business and enable CBA to enhance its focus on its core banking businesses in Australia and New Zealand and create a simpler, better bank,” the statement said.
Commonwealth Bank chief executive Matt Comyn said the de-merger of the wealth management and broking businesses reflected changes in the industry and consumer preferences.
“With innovation and disruption in wealth management increasingly favouring specialist companies, they will benefit from independence and the capacity to focus on new growth options without constraints of being part of a large banking group,” he said.
Commonwealth Financial Planning will stay within the bank’s retail banking services team led by Angus Sullivan.
Meanwhile, the bank’s former general counsel David Cohen – who led the legal operations during the parliamentary inquiry into Commonwealth FP and the start of the royal commission – has been named deputy CEO.
Remember when Colonial had their own Financial Planners and Brokers? Then when CBA purchased them they morphed into Fin Whizz. I wonder if Colonial will set up their own AFSL and go back down that road again. Regardless the last thing we need is another AMP like firm out there.
Be careful what you wish for. The purchaser has long had its own “tied “advisers targeting specific ethnic groups-maybe still selling old WOL
and yet one of the ‘foundation’ Licensees at the centre of the whistle blowers pre-FOFA – Commonwealth Financial Planning, will be retained???
We can now ALL use the term independent – as it has become meaningless, thanks to CBA’s announcement…which was always the intention. Once independence is no longer a “thing” with any meaning it can’t be enforced. Clever bastards, all of them! I’m normally very supportive of ASIC, but if they allow this to happen as we’re seeing it then that will change.Meanwhile, those of us who are truly independent (self-licenced, open APL, owned by the adviser) have been effectively sidelined in the marketing sense, but not in the most important discussion of all – that between us and our clients. Getting new ones won’t be made easier by this, but once we have them, demonstrating our true independence ensures we keep them and that they refer others. So don’t be too discouraged.
So we can’t sell off the asset manager in an IPO so lets just lump all the stuff causing us problems into a separate bundle that we still own and ring fence it from the core business until we can dump it onto someone else. We’ll call it independent as people will buy that. In the meantime, we’ve got a huge pot of mum’s and dad’s savings pie we can leverage off to do new and exciting things and fund forays into becoming a global banking power house!
settle down people – they mean “independent” of the bank – not as per the corps act. IF the outcome of the RC means regulators directed by govt say “no vertical alignment” then yes CFS Group will have that to deal with. CFS is a market leader and has been since Chris Cuffe days – getting some more control back from the CBA is a great thing and should be celebrated.
It doesn’t matter what they mean.That statement breaks the law. But I bet that ASIC does nothing. No, instead they like to spend their time hounding advisers who have their own AFSL and no links to any of the institutions, who dare to call themselves ‘independent’.
To quote a friend: “the banks came in, ruined our industry, and now are throwing their hands up saying, well that was fun, now we’ll leave you all to it!”
Yup
All they’re doing is creating a new AMP. We know how well the old AMP has done.
This does nothing to solve the problems we’re seeing in the industry. Product and Advice should be clearly separated. Financial Planners putting their industry, their future in the hands of product manufacturers whether owned by a Bank or AMP has done them nothing. Dear Mr Adviser…How has FASEA worked out for you? How is that red tape, over regulation worked out for you, how has being compared to a cowboy by the general public worked out for you? Time for a @$@$$ change for #@ sake.
Independent ????? Only after the attached dealer groups are stand alone or also de-merged from the new group. Maybe!!! Watch the exodus to real independent groups as it does not meet definition.
How does this possibly qualify as “independent” – where is ASIC in all this. NAB/MLC claimed the same.
CBA realising the future of financial planning can’t pay AND be compliant or moral.
There is going to be so much polishing of turds you’ll need sunglasses.
It going to be a big national group of car salesmen and BDM’s all selling snake oil.
As a CBA shareholder I say about time and thank goodness this litigious industry can leave the bank.
My understanding we are wanting to remove any product ‘bias’, CFS is still a product manufacturer. Financial Wisdom and Count under CFS, still vertical intergration.
Independent – WTF. We cant use that term – why can they just drop it like it doesnt matter. No way this firm meets the independent rules under the corps act
And CFS Group may have to have a demerger if they ban vertical integration
“These initiatives will result in the creation of a leading independent wealth management business” … Independent? No ownership by CBA? No commissions? Fee for service only? Reminds me of one of my favourite punch lines. “Lucky I didn’t step in it” – Cheech and Chong